[WCCF] AMD Radeon R9 390X Pictured

[EXCellR8]

Gonna have to agree. If the performance was there (and significant enough) without you even really noticing a second (or third) card, then I'd be all for it as well.

 

[maddie]

Would be nice but it wouldn't be a game changer for me. I've pretty much sworn off multi GPU after having so many issues with the tech over the years. Only thing that would change my mind is if it ever gets to the point of functioning exactly like a single GPU.

He's saying multi die GPU without you knowing it. Not CFX or SLI.

 

[HurleyBird]

The way HBM achieves its astounding bandwidth is by keeping all the interconnects in the silicon interposer. For more than one GPU chip to share memory at the expected bandwidth, all GPUs and memory chips would have to be mounted on a single interposer.

That's certainly an interesting thought. I'd be a bit surprised to see such a card built using Fiji chips, but I can see AMD/Nvidia moving this direction with 14nm GPUs.

 

[railven]

So it may come down to:
AMD Fiji XT 4GB - $849 - 300W
GTX Titan X 12GB - $999 - 250W
GTX 980 Ti 6GB - $800 (-10% in performance) - 230W

decisions decisions :hmm:

These prices are just so depressing.

I wonder what Fiji Pro (or whatever the cut down Fiji) will cost?

 

[crashtech]

That's certainly an interesting thought. I'd be a bit surprised to see such a card built using Fiji chips, but I can see AMD/Nvidia moving this direction with 14nm GPUs.

It's purely hypothetical, and not the way CF is done currently of course. The poster was wondering about sharing memory between cards, but with current methods such sharing would be extremely slow, through some kind of external interface.

 

[RampantAndroid]

If this card turns out to be 8GB and cheaper. I hope people rub it in hard.

Yes, because going by a bunch of rumors, ranging from "4GB is the limit", to AMD themselves saying "you don't need more than 4" makes it totally unreasonable to think their card will be limited to 4GB. Fanboys = people who read.

I will be very sad if the 980TI is $800...I'll just buy a 980 at that point. Or pass on this generation.

 

[swilli89]

Yes, because going by a bunch of rumors, ranging from "4GB is the limit", to AMD themselves saying "you don't need more than 4" makes it totally unreasonable to think their card will be limited to 4GB. Fanboys = people who read.

I will be very sad if the 980TI is $800...I'll just buy a 980 at that point. Or pass on this generation.

How can you say anything at this point without knowing the performance of the 980 TI or 390X? What card do you have right now?

 

[boozzer]

Yes, because going by a bunch of rumors, ranging from "4GB is the limit", to AMD themselves saying "you don't need more than 4" makes it totally unreasonable to think their card will be limited to 4GB. Fanboys = people who read.

I will be very sad if the 980TI is $800...I'll just buy a 980 at that point. Or pass on this generation.

by this point I would 100% agree with you that 390x could very well be 4gb hbm with maybe bigger vram versions to come out later.

BUT, it is totally unreasonable to assume it's performance without benchmarks 🙂 that is what alot of you guys are doing. that is crapping on a new flagship gpu even before it's release. that says alot about you. 😎

 

[RussianSensation]

As much as I hate to admit being a user of both, it is really nice having the option to choose between the two on the fly. Sure, it's more expensive to have two machines but both have their strengths and weaknesses...

I think you have your systems setup incorrectly. AMD's cards require much faster CPUs to take full advantage of them. Conversely, NV cards run better with slower GPUs and when SLI fails, that 690 is just a single ~ 680. 680/690 should be a much better fit for the FX6350 for both of those reasons while to get the full performance out of the 290X, it has to be paired with a fast CPU such as the 3570K you have. 😛

These prices are just so depressing.

I wonder what Fiji Pro (or whatever the cut down Fiji) will cost?

The $849 price sounds like made up BS. If NV replaces 780Ti with $699 980Ti, there is no way AMD will be able to price Fiji XT at $849 as no one would buy it. The other reason is AMD would go from $549 flagship pricing for HD7970, $499 for 7970Ghz and $549 for 290X all the way to $849? Nope, not happening. AMD probably leaked this price on purpose to surprise come launch date or it's just made up pricing by random people on the Internet.

Remember that HD7950 was $449, R9 290 was $399. That means we should see Fiji PRO in the $399-499 space, maybe $549 if Fiji PRO is 15% faster than a 980. That leaves us with a $300 price gap between a Fiji PRO and Fiji XT? Nope.

AMD would be smarter to price this card at $699 and offer AIO CLC and miniITX PCB as a key competitive advantage over the 980Ti's 6GB of VRAM. All of a sudden the card is competitive with a 980Ti for different reasons. At $849, even if it's 10% faster than the Titan X, most of the market simply won't care. If AMD wants to regain market share, there has to be a Fiji XT card at $699 or below, even if it's an air cooled variant. If AMD raises the price from $549 all the way to $849, even its fans will feel ripped off. That's not good for the brand.

Then of course cards like EVGA Classified 980 are going for $575. This card has 1393 mhz clocks out of the box which means it's easily within 15% of the Titan X. If Fiji XT is $849 and it's only as fast as the Titan X, who the hell would buy it over that EVGA Classified 980? Only AMD fanboys.

I think there is too much fear mongering happening because of the $1K price of Titan X. The last time AMD introduced new cards, R9 290 cost $399 and put the lights out on the $650 780, while R9 290X cost $549 and put the lights out on the $1K OG Titan. Fiji PRO at $449-499 and Fiji XT for $599-699 sounds a lot more reasonable.

Another reason Fiji XT should be price closer to $699 is because at that point it's much harder to recommended GTX970 SLI against it. Most people would pay $100 extra to not have to deal with SLI. However, if we are talking $600 970 SLI vs. $850 Fiji XT with similar performance, it's not that simple. AMD also needs to account for the fact that 970/980 cards have a solid game bundle with 2 good games!

 

[Azix]

Yes, because going by a bunch of rumors, ranging from "4GB is the limit", to AMD themselves saying "you don't need more than 4" makes it totally unreasonable to think their card will be limited to 4GB. Fanboys = people who read.

I will be very sad if the 980TI is $800...I'll just buy a 980 at that point. Or pass on this generation.

Never said it was unreasonable, although a sensible reading of the information would not give one high confidence that it was certainly 4GB. It could be and it might not be. Rumors don't beat what AMD themselves said about not being limited to 4 stacks.

Sucks to think people like that dice guy know all the answers and we are here speculating. Someone go get him drunk and find out what he spills

 

[Silverforce11]

Another reason Fiji XT should be price closer to $699 is because at that point it's much harder to recommended GTX970 SLI against it. Most people would pay $100 extra to not have to deal with SLI. However, if we are talking $600 970 SLI vs. $850 Fiji XT with similar performance, it's not that simple. AMD also needs to account for the fact that 970/980 cards have a solid game bundle with 2 good games!

RS you have to realize that not many people think like you when it comes to value, they won't think, hmm, 2x 970 for $700 with better performance for less than Titan X or 980Ti or 390X is a good deal. They see SLI or CF and its automatically a non-option. Despite all the attempts from NV & AMD on multi-GPU, it remains a niche ever since 3dfx invented the tech so long ago.

 

[destrekor]

RS you have to realize that not many people think like you when it comes to value, they won't think, hmm, 2x 970 for $700 with better performance for less than Titan X or 980Ti or 390X is a good deal. They see SLI or CF and its automatically a non-option. Despite all the attempts from NV & AMD on multi-GPU, it remains a niche ever since 3dfx invented the tech so long ago.

There are valid reasons for this, and I say this as someone who has had multi-GPU for the past two upgrade cycles.

If I could, I'd ditch CFX/SLI in a heartbeat. It is not guaranteed to perform well, as efficient scaling is not etched in stone by any means. Sometimes patching and driver updates months after a game's release, if not 6-12 months, may solve this, so it is up to the individual to determine if that wait is okay or if they want to play games (especially multiplayer) when they are at their peak. However, not all games ever get fixed appropriately, or products from either AMD or Nvidia forever remain low-performers for certain games.

And then there is microstutter. Sometimes it is simply an issue with the individual system hardware/software configuration, but often it is a game or driver issue, and for any given game, if not an entire game engine, it can take forever to see certain issues resolved.

If a game certainly performs bad for a given GPU brand, that's one thing, but CFX/SLI profiles or the game's efficient use of multi-GPU resources are another thing. Add all of that up, and sometimes multi-GPU is a lot more frustration that PC gaming should ever be, especially when factors like driver updates or game patches are required and out of your control. I've been frustrated by that far too many times, but I put up with it because single-GPUs aren't where they should be for 3x1080 or UHD/4K, so the grunt of multi-GPUs is very much welcome when it works smoothly.

Give me a single card that can pull its weight for the same or better cost effectiveness, and I'll kiss multi-GPU goodbye. Due to various factors, it is not currently "more trouble than it is worth" since the value proposition can be incredible, but it can be a lot of trouble. Some people get lucky based on game selection and perhaps specific hardware configuration. I both have and haven't been, as I've experienced these pains too many times IMHO, but I have also not experienced them where others have in various games.

 

[3DVagabond]

RS you have to realize that not many people think like you when it comes to value, they won't think, hmm, 2x 970 for $700 with better performance for less than Titan X or 980Ti or 390X is a good deal. They see SLI or CF and its automatically a non-option. Despite all the attempts from NV & AMD on multi-GPU, it remains a niche ever since 3dfx invented the tech so long ago.

Except when AMD had the stuttering/dropped frame issues. Then Dual GPU was pushed like crazy by nVidia supporters here.

 

[RussianSensation]

RS you have to realize that not many people think like you when it comes to value, they won't think, hmm, 2x 970 for $700 with better performance for less than Titan X or 980Ti or 390X is a good deal. They see SLI or CF and its automatically a non-option. Despite all the attempts from NV & AMD on multi-GPU, it remains a niche ever since 3dfx invented the tech so long ago.

Maybe the example I provided isn't good, but in certain cases SLI is a no brainer over a single card (i.e., 970 SLI vs. 980). My point is the overall picture of the market. Fiji XT priced at $849 would be a fail even if it beats the Titan X. Think about it, all NV needs to do is price 980Ti at $699 and it's game over. Most gamers will buy a slightly slower NV card all things being equal. In this case, $699 980Ti vs. an $850 Fiji XT? It wouldn't even be a contest! Alternatively, you can readily pick up a 980 for $515 and EVGA Classy if $575. With those prices, an AMD card as fast as the Titan X won't sell at $850. The type of gamers who buy AMD cards aren't going to throw that kind of $ on a GPU even if it's as fast as the Titan X.

There are other factors to consider:

1) Lack of high quality FreeSync monitors
2) Lack of high quality 4K monitors
3) Lack of true next generation PC games coming out in the next 6 months. What are these games? Star Wars Battlefront?
4) $850 for 4GB of HBM is a no go, automatically.
5) A lot of gamers realize this generation is a stop-gap, so they'll be more reluctant to spend more $ this time. 4GB of HBM and high price will just push them over the edge to get the NV card or skip this entire gen.
6) AMD's flagship prices have been $499-549 for 4 years now. It would be too dramatic for the marketplace for AMD to raise it from that level all the way to $849 with a single-chip flagship in just 1 generation. This is not the generation to do it for all the factors above. That's my opinion of course but if you want to command such crazy high prices, you gotta be King of the Hill by 30-40% for months. You know like when HD5870 launched 6 months early. Launching in a similar time-frame to a 980Ti doesn't give AMD any leverage now to have any first mover advantage, which means their ability to command huge early adopter tax is nearly non-existent.
7) Market share is all time low. Raising prices to stratospheric Titan X levels doesn't gain market share.

In addition, if AMD wants to strengthen its brand name, and do desire to raise prices, they should do so gradually. So perhaps price Fiji XT at $649, 699 tops. More so, since AMD's market share is so low, to make a statement, AMD should offer a product more enticing at every price level. Ideally, AMD needs Fiji XT to beat the 980Ti but it shouldn't cost more than the NV's card. This is because most gamers won't pay the same $$$ for an AMD card. That means if 980Ti is $699, even if Fiji is 5-10% faster, price it at $649-699. That's how you gain back market share.

To add to the factors I described, PC gamers today are aware that high-end GPUs depreciate like a rock. $699 780TI lose $350 of its value in 12 months. R9 295X2 lost $900 of its value as you can buy it for $575. AMD can price Fiji XT at $849 if it wants but if they do, good luck generating sales! ^_^

Except when AMD had the stuttering/dropped frame issues. Then Dual GPU was pushed like crazy by nVidia supporters here.

I have to say I haven't many NV users on these boards recommend R9 295X2 over a 980. I don't think I've seen it even once in the last month. R9 295X2 has been selling for $550-600 for months. Performance at 1440P and 4K mops the floor with a 980, while it runs cooler and quieter than almost any 980, besides the Hybrid EVGA 980.

67% faster than a 980 at 4K. If it wasn't for GW titles, R9 295X2 scaling would have ensured that 980 is irrelevant for high end gaming (FC4 developer patch *cough*).

 

[3DVagabond]

Maybe the example I provided isn't good, but in certain cases SLI is a no brainer over a single card (i.e., 970 SLI vs. 980). My point is the overall picture of the market. Fiji XT priced at $849 would be a fail even if it beats the Titan X. Think about it, all NV needs to do is price 980Ti at $699 and it's game over. Most gamers will buy a slightly slower NV card all things being equal. In this case, $699 980Ti vs. an $850 Fiji XT? It wouldn't even be a contest! Alternatively, you can readily pick up a 980 for $515 and EVGA Classy if $575. With those prices, an AMD card as fast as the Titan X won't sell at $850. The type of gamers who buy AMD cards aren't going to throw that kind of $ on a GPU even if it's as fast as the Titan X.

There are other factors to consider:

1) Lack of high quality FreeSync monitors
2) Lack of high quality 4K monitors
3) Lack of true next generation PC games coming out in the next 6 months. What are these games? Star Wars Battlefront?
4) $850 for 4GB of HBM is a no go, automatically.
5) A lot of gamers realize this generation is a stop-gap, so they'll be more reluctant to spend more $ this time. 4GB of HBM and high price will just push them over the edge to get the NV card or skip this entire gen.
6) AMD's flagship prices have been $499-549 for 4 years now. It would be too dramatic for the marketplace for AMD to raise it from that level all the way to $849 with a single-chip flagship in just 1 generation. This is not the generation to do it for all the factors above. That's my opinion of course but if you want to command such crazy high prices, you gotta be King of the Hill by 30-40% for months. You know like when HD5870 launched 6 months early. Launching in a similar time-frame to a 980Ti doesn't give AMD any leverage now to have any first mover advantage, which means their ability to command huge early adopter tax is nearly non-existent.
7) Market share is all time low. Raising prices to stratospheric Titan X levels doesn't gain market share.

In addition, if AMD wants to strengthen its brand name, and do desire to raise prices, they should do so gradually. So perhaps price Fiji XT at $649, 699 tops. More so, since AMD's market share is so low, to make a statement, AMD should offer a product more enticing at every price level. Ideally, AMD needs Fiji XT to beat the 980Ti but it shouldn't cost more than the NV's card. This is because most gamers won't pay the same $$$ for an AMD card. That means if 980Ti is $699, even if Fiji is 5-10% faster, price it at $649-699. That's how you gain back market share.

To add to the factors I described, PC gamers today are aware that high-end GPUs depreciate like a rock. $699 780TI lose $350 of its value in 12 months. R9 295X2 lost $900 of its value as you can buy it for $575. AMD can price Fiji XT at $849 if it wants but if they do, good luck generating sales! ^_^

nVidia had no problem going from $500 to $1000 in one generation. And that $1000 was actually the 570's replacement in the lineup. I only mention this because it can be done. AMD will have to step their game up and offer a spectacular release. Something I realize they haven't done since the 5000 series. They seem to be taking their time though and hopefully that is why.

The 4GB could be an issue, but they are saying they can deal with that. In spite of what the nay sayers claim, we really have no reason not to give them the benefit on this.

Also, we don't know what they are going to charge. hopefully, if HBM requires a large premium, it will be worth it. You know as well as I do if it were nVidia that was releasing HBM everyone would be touting it as making GDDR5 obsolete. One way to look at it, would you prefer 8GB of GDDR3 on a 512 bit MB with the 980? Or the current 256 bit GDDR5 setup? I think we both know the answer to that.

 

[RussianSensation]

nVidia had no problem going from $500 to $1000 in one generation. And that $1000 was actually the 570's replacement in the lineup. I only mention this because it can be done. AMD will have to step their game up and offer a spectacular release. Something I realize they haven't done since the 5000 series. They seem to be taking their time though and hopefully that is why.

But that's the thing - 5870's launch was all about timing of offering new features and performance. 5870 beat 285 by 26-45% at 1080P with AA, and by 35-74% at 1600P with AA. That's not going to happen now that NV will have 980Ti and the Titan X. AMD doesn't have the memory size required or the performance to pull off a stunt that was the 5870 vs. 285.

The 4GB could be an issue, but they are saying they can deal with that. In spite of what the nay sayers claim, we really have no reason not to give them the benefit on this.

If someone is buying a 'stop-gap' card for $499-599, sure 4GB is probably OK. If I am paying $750-850, I think it's not OK. Think about it, I can overclock the 980Ti 15-20%, but I can't come up with extra 2GB of VRAM. If we view these cards as 18-24 months stop-gap, then I agree 4GB vs. 6-12GB doesn't matter. But if we view these cards as stop-gap, then who wants to pay $800+ for a stop-gap card? Not many.

Also, we don't know what they are going to charge. hopefully, if HBM requires a large premium, it will be worth it.

Ya, that's true. I think even if there is some version priced at $849, there will be lower tired Fiji cards (PRO, etc.) priced at $499-599 that will offer great price/performance. AMD's 2nd tier cards are always the better buys in their high-end line-up. This has been true for 4 consecutive generations. I have a feeling it will remain true again. 3584-3840 Fiji PRO with the same HBM and ROP backbone of Fiji XT should be highly competitive once overclocked. Of course, a lot of people are all about e-peen so they only care about the XT version.

You know as well as I do if it were nVidia that was releasing HBM everyone would be touting it as making GDDR5 obsolete. One way to look at it, would you prefer 8GB of GDDR3 on a 512 bit MB with the 980? Or the current 256 bit GDDR5 setup? I think we both know the answer to that.

Yup. The minute NV releases a miniITX card with AIO CLC stock, it'll be hailed as revolutionary and ground-breaking and from taht moment on, every single flagship that tries to use air cooling will be ridiculed as hot and loud. Until that point you can expect fans of their preferred brand to maintain that AMD "needed" / "required" WC to compete with NV's far superior air cooled products. 😛

 

[RampantAndroid]

How can you say anything at this point without knowing the performance of the 980 TI or 390X? What card do you have right now?

I am unwilling to spend that kind of money on a card. I have better things to put money into....I've got a wedding coming up 😉 I've got 2x670s right now. I have no desire to ever see SLI again, and I'd go up to maybe $500 for a good enough card...MAYBE push it some if the 980ti/390x showed itself to be considerably better and be able to live an extra couple of years in my box...but I doubt that'll be true (as in, at $600 I'd think about it. Not at 7-800. I won't even consider it.)

It's just depressing how costs on these cards have risen. Since I'm moving to 1440p soon (just really holding off to get a card at the same time) 4GB is a must, if not more. I don't game enough to justify yearly (or even biennial) upgrades. What I buy needs to last. I've got a Ivy Bridge chip that MIGHT get replaced by Skybridge...but that's a big maybe.

 

[3DVagabond]

I am unwilling to spend that kind of money on a card. I have better things to put money into....I've got a wedding coming up 😉 I've got 2x670s right now. I have no desire to ever see SLI again, and I'd go up to maybe $500 for a good enough card...MAYBE push it some if the 980ti/390x showed itself to be considerably better and be able to live an extra couple of years in my box...but I doubt that'll be true (as in, at $600 I'd think about it. Not at 7-800. I won't even consider it.)

It's just depressing how costs on these cards have risen. Since I'm moving to 1440p soon (just really holding off to get a card at the same time) 4GB is a must, if not more. I don't game enough to justify yearly (or even biennial) upgrades. What I buy needs to last. I've got a Ivy Bridge chip that MIGHT get replaced by Skybridge...but that's a big maybe.

This I wholeheartedly agree with. I'm hoping AMD resists the urge to charge a premium just because they think they can. It mostly seems to be nVidia fans that are hoping for this.

All of the new tech and the size of the chip might mean they have to charge ~$800ish to make a profit? If so then nVidia really played into AMD's hands raising prices like they have. What could AMD have done if nVidia kept their tech too low priced for AMD to match?

 

[coercitiv]

MAYBE push it some if the 980ti/390x showed itself to be considerably better and be able to live an extra couple of years in my box...but I doubt that'll be true

node jump will likely reset everything

 

[swilli89]

I am unwilling to spend that kind of money on a card. I have better things to put money into....I've got a wedding coming up 😉 I've got 2x670s right now. I have no desire to ever see SLI again, and I'd go up to maybe $500 for a good enough card...MAYBE push it some if the 980ti/390x showed itself to be considerably better and be able to live an extra couple of years in my box...but I doubt that'll be true (as in, at $600 I'd think about it. Not at 7-800. I won't even consider it.)

It's just depressing how costs on these cards have risen. Since I'm moving to 1440p soon (just really holding off to get a card at the same time) 4GB is a must, if not more. I don't game enough to justify yearly (or even biennial) upgrades. What I buy needs to last. I've got a Ivy Bridge chip that MIGHT get replaced by Skybridge...but that's a big maybe.

Yeah the prices are truly depressing. However I'm going to make a prediction that I think will be close to reality. I bet AMD is gonna drop what is more or less titan x power at just North of $500. We shall see!

 

[Cloudfire777]

These prices are just so depressing.

I wonder what Fiji Pro (or whatever the cut down Fiji) will cost?

Yeah, doesnt look like we get $500 graphic cards this time around.

But lets be honest here. We are still at 28nm. Both Fiji and GM200 extend way beyond whats considered a bargain for AMD/Nvidia to manufacture too considering the 600mm2 size and all. We want faster GPUs, TSMC is unable to manufacture them in 20nm like they should have, Nvidia and AMD try to fill in the demands, and have to price them accordingly. That GTX 980Ti may cost $750-800 while AMD may be slightly more expensive this time around is because they too are building a behemoth of a die for the Fiji, not just the cores themselves but also a brand new more expensive type of HBM which also need to go inside the GPU package/silicon which cost money to make.
AND on top of that they had Cooler Master make a water cooled solution for the Fiji. All in all, its not a bad bargian imo. Its just that we have been used to very low prices like the 295X2 selling for $600 that features two GPU chips as well as water cooling. That price shouldnt have much foothold in reality, Im sure AMD priced it that low to keep Titan X sales atleast a little at bay. I hardly think there are much profit from those sales.

The people looking for the best performance/ratio should all wait til 2016 where we get new architecture from both and a new node. That should normalize the price again. Even HBM should be cheaper to manufacture at that point due to more companies using it for other products as well and HBM yields are increasingly better.

Short summary:
Want the best right now and have the money, go get TitanX/980Ti and Fiji XT, although people should wait for water cooled versions of the GM200 cards imo.
A little short on money? Wait til 2016 and get R9 400 series and Pascal. Go down in graphic settings on your current cards and look ahead and try not to cry too much from not running the highest settings 😛

I don`t know what to expect from Fiji Pro to be honest. Does it have water cooling as well? HBM? Build quality? Way too many unknowns at this point

 

[Cloudfire777]

Looks like the shipping of Fiji XT have picked up as well 🙂
Before May we had one shipment in February.

Here is proof that the above truly is Fiji XT 🙂

 

[Azix]

Yeah, doesnt look like we get $500 graphic cards this time around.

But lets be honest here. We are still at 28nm. Both Fiji and GM200 extend way beyond whats considered a bargain for AMD/Nvidia to manufacture too considering the 600mm2 size and all. We want faster GPUs, TSMC is unable to manufacture them in 20nm like they should have, Nvidia and AMD try to fill in the demands, and have to price them accordingly. That GTX 980Ti may cost $750-800 while AMD may be slightly more expensive this time around is because they too are building a behemoth of a die for the Fiji, not just the cores themselves but also a brand new more expensive type of HBM which also need to go inside the GPU package/silicon which cost money to make.
AND on top of that they had Cooler Master make a water cooled solution for the Fiji. All in all, its not a bad bargian imo. Its just that we have been used to very low prices like the 295X2 selling for $600 that features two GPU chips as well as water cooling. That price shouldnt have much foothold in reality, Im sure AMD priced it that low to keep Titan X sales atleast a little at bay. I hardly think there are much profit from those sales.

still being on 28nm is not a bad thing for cost. Being on an even better 28nm process is also good for cost. Fiji might be 600mm^2 if they didn't use HBM and didn't use the global foundry process. It could end up around the size of hawaii or just a bit bigger depending on the space saved with HBM and the 28SHP process. It could be under 500mm^2

They have more cores, but they also have other technology saving space. Wafer costs are likely lower with glofo. Do we know the value of each quantity? No. Got to wait and see.

Looks like the shipping of Fiji XT have picked up as well 🙂
Before May we had one shipment in February.

Here is proof that the above truly is Fiji XT 🙂

should it not be possible to calculate potential cost from that?

 

[Cloudfire777]

78000INR = $1200

Hawaii XT aka R9 290X had a value of 40000INR ($629) when it was shipped before it was announced.

So thats a good indication that Fiji XT will be a costly card, no doubt about that. I feel $850 seems very plausible, considering value and that they will market it as premium as Titan cards from Nvidia

 

[Stormflux]

I'm going to have to agree with the recent SLI/Crossfire discussions going on lately. It's not worth it because of the unreliable nature of them. Until they fix this inconsistency in guaranteed day one usage, it will always be sidelined to extreme enthusiast.

I personally feel this is how VR should push Dual GPU set ups and make them more common. If you can bypass the required IHV Driver profiles, and in an SDK, have it utilize one eye to one card. This should take the pressure off IHVs and put them into Gamedevs.

I'm hoping RS is bang on the money for these cards. Fiji Pro would be ideal for me. Agree as well that AMD is in no position to command such a premium. Rebuilding the brand, and increasing market awareness should be the key here until 14/16nm and HBM2.