• 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.

[Various]Radeon Fury X and Radeon Fury coming

Status
Not open for further replies.
C

Cloudfire777

Golden Member
Hardwareluxx:

  • Fury X:
  • Slower than GTX 980Ti
  • Water cooler made by CoolIT
  • Confirmed to have 4GB HBM
  • PSU of 700W is recommended
Sweclockers:

  • Radeon Fury post poned because of bad yields (did not specify what had bad yields but will guess HBM).
  • Radeon Fury X is 17cm in length
  • Radeon Fury X will be launched as an alternative to GTX 980Ti whatever that means
  • GTX 980Ti was launched to make it difficult for AMD to succeed with Fury cards
  • Radeon Fury X was originally planned to launch at a high price (but lower than Titan X) but GTX 980Ti have made them changed plans and AMD is now preparing to launch the card at around $600 with low profit/margin to have a chance against GTX 980Ti
TweakTown

Radeon R9 Fury X will be the flagship video card, a watercooled partbased on the Fiji XT GPU. Under that, we'll have the Radeon R9 Fury, which should be based on the Fiji PRO architecture, with an entire restack of current cards
Click to expand...
Radeon R9 Fury X will be a reference card with AIBs not able to change the cooler, but TweakTown can confirm that it will be the short card that has been spotted in the leaked images. The Radeon R9 Fury will see aftermarket coolers placed onto it, so we should see some very interesting cards released under the Radeon R9 Fury family. Both will have HBM High Bandwidth Memory.
Click to expand...
Radeon R9 Fury X has a rumored MSRP of $849, making it $200 more than the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 Ti, but $150 cheaper than the Titan X
Click to expand...



We can leave the inflammatory thread title out. Thanks


-Rvenger
 
Last edited by a moderator:
30% more expensive than than 980Ti? It has to outperform it by quite a bit to justify that price if true. I would say at least 15% more performance at stock and some mean OC capabilities.
 
Noctifer616 said:
30% more expensive than than 980Ti? It has to outperform it by quite a bit to justify that price if true. I would say at least 15% more performance at stock and some mean OC capabilities.
Click to expand...

Why, if it's so much cheaper than the Titan X and the Titan X is not 15% faster than a 980ti? Seems like the expectation is that their high end will perform quite well - faster than a 980ti, but whether or not that's 'worth it' ends up coming down to a subjective choice. You want a top end card, you dish out for it. You want much of that performance for quite a bit less money, and/or are willing to use a multi-gpu setup, go for that.
 
Aristotelian said:
Why, if it's so much cheaper than the Titan X and the Titan X is not 15% faster than a 980ti?
Click to expand...

The TitanX has been made irrelevant by the 980Ti. It would be insane for the card to be priced against the Titan X when the 980Ti has almost the same performance for much less cash.
 
Noctifer616 said:
The TitanX has been made irrelevant by the 980Ti. It would be insane for the card to be priced against the Titan X when the 980Ti has almost the same performance for much less cash.
Click to expand...

And from that basis if the Fury X is faster than the 980Ti by a 'insert amount', I guess AMD will try to milk the 'fastest single gpu card' crowd for as much as they can get.

Having said that, I'm really interested in this product launch - my upgrade itch is kicking in again.
 
Aristotelian said:
And from that basis if the Fury X is faster than the 980Ti by a 'insert amount', I guess AMD will try to milk the 'fastest single gpu card' crowd for as much as they can get.
Click to expand...

That's why I said it should be at least 15% faster to justify a 30% price increase.

Aristotelian said:
Having said that, I'm really interested in this product launch - my upgrade itch is kicking in again.
Click to expand...

I am not going to upgrade till next year probably, but I am really excited about the new cards. I really hope AMD will give us some info at the press conference tomorrow.
 
Noctifer616 said:
The TitanX has been made irrelevant by the 980Ti.
Click to expand...
It'll almost certainly continue to sell, that's why it was left at $999.

The market obviously accepts nVidia's pricing, so AMD should rightfully compete in that price range if they have the performance to do so.
 
Noctifer616 said:
30% more expensive than than 980Ti? It has to outperform it by quite a bit to justify that price if true. I would say at least 15% more performance at stock and some mean OC capabilities.
Click to expand...

I agree with what you said I will get either GTX 980Ti EVGA Hybrid wich also have water cooling as well for $749. Or Fury X for $849.
I have really good experience with Nvidia, so I need better performance with the Fury X to buy it.

15% ish faster performance and not shocking high TDP/Power/noise, and I will get Fury X for that price.
 
Last edited:
It'll almost certainly continue to sell, that's why it was left at $999.

The market obviously accepts nVidia's pricing, so AMD should rightfully compete in that price range if they have the performance to do so.
Click to expand...
The Titan X is designed more for people who really need the 12GB of RAM for GPU computing-related purposes, and probably don't mind playing a game or two with it (leaving aside the people that just have more money than sense). If they really were targeting the Titan X's performance for their top-end product, then the 980 Ti may well have wrong-footed them. We'll have to wait and see.

On another note, I'm not too keen on the name "Radeon Fury X." Sounds too much like "Rage Fury Maxx" for my liking.
 
Knowing Nvidia, they are keeping Titan X performance down so everyone buys a 980 Ti because (omg omg omg Titan X performance for $300 less! What a deal) and then they later say, oh there was a bug, 980 Ti was never intended to match Titan X performance, and they either further optimize Titan X to be faster, or downgrade Ti to restore relevancy to Titan X. At least... that's what I would do if I were CEO of Nvidia.
 
LTC8K6 said:
So it sounds like most people were correct. One new GPU chip and the rest rebrands.
Click to expand...
Its because Fiji is not a new architecture.
AMD have just scaled up the chip from 290X with more cores and included HBM.

Thats why I`m not 100% optimistic about TDP and power consumption vs 980Ti.
 
Cloudfire777 said:
Its because Fiji is not a new architecture.
AMD have just scaled up the chip from 290X with more cores and included HBM.

Thats why I`m not 100% optimistic about TDP and power consumption vs 980Ti.
Click to expand...

How do you know that ? why do few people just talk with so much authority when they are literally as clueless as everyone else is ? Nobody knows the extent of the architectural improvements in R9 3xx. So please atleast don't go about talking as if you know something for a fact. 🙄
 
lol

A Titan X-killer we do not expect: we caught on that the performance level slightly below that of the Nvidia GeForce GTX 980 Ti would be. For this purpose, the clock frequency will increase to more than 1 GHz. The power was called 'under the 300 watt, "we probably can deduce that the consumption above that of the 980 Ti and Titan X will lie. Namely both those cards have a TDP of 250 watts, which is often not achieved in practice.
Click to expand...

http://nl.hardware.info/nieuws/43996/computex-amd-toont-fiji-videokaart-achter-gesloten-deuren

lol v2

The cards also can't run in their current form, as no BIOS is present. It can therefore only be switched on, but no image will appear on a screen.

The partner did hint at the performance. Apparently the Radeon Fury X ought to be slower than the GeForce GTX 980 Ti. Currently, AMD is still trying to optimize higher clock rates and is making adjustments to the driver's performance. Performance related to power consumption is therefore likely to be a critical issue for "Fiji".
Click to expand...

http://www.hardwareluxx.com/index.p...ka-fury-x-slower-than-geforce-gtx-980-ti.html
 
Last edited:
dave1029 said:
Knowing Nvidia, they are keeping Titan X performance down so everyone buys a 980 Ti because (omg omg omg Titan X performance for $300 less! What a deal) and then they later say, oh there was a bug, 980 Ti was never intended to match Titan X performance, and they either further optimize Titan X to be faster, or downgrade Ti to restore relevancy to Titan X. At least... that's what I would do if I were CEO of Nvidia.
Click to expand...

Then your company probably wouldnt survive the wrath of the Internet.
 
-R9 380 4gb $199

-R9 390 8gb $299

-R9 390x 8gb $399

-Fiji pro 4gb hbm $599

-Fiji xt 4gb hbm $749

-Fiji xt /xtx 8gb hbm $849

-Fiji vr 2x8gb hbm $1399-$1499
 
csbin said:
-R9 380 4gb $199

-R9 390 8gb $299

-R9 390x 8gb $399

-Fiji pro 4gb hbm $599

-Fiji xt 4gb hbm $749

-Fiji xt /xtx 8gb hbm $849

-Fiji vr 2x8gb hbm $1399-$1499
Click to expand...

That doesn't seem to match the rumors, though.

I would guess that we will have only 2 Fiji cards for a while.

Both probably with 4gb of HBM.
 
AMD doesn't have the marketing to ask more that nvidia for the same performance. The watercooler version may have a premium but the air Fiji will be $599 or less.
 
DiogoDX said:
AMD doesn't have the marketing to ask more that nvidia for the same performance. The watercooler version may have a premium but the air Fiji will be $599 or less.
Click to expand...

This.

$599 if it matches the 980Ti performance. $549 tops, if it is even just 2% slower than the 980Ti.

The power consumption worries me though. Not as much on the wattage itself, but the headroom for OCing.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top