That's why I and few others assume that if Nvidia would even use a CLC it will be on Titan model only with an air cooler for ti model like Fury X and Fury. Titan models until recently have been reference only (with EVGA having hybrid version for Titan X) if I recall correctly.
railven
Diamond Member
- Mar 25, 2010
- 6,604
- 561
- 126
Using current Fury and Fury X, what is the premium?
If AMD offered an Air version for Fury X, what would the price be? $600? I think at that point they invalidated the $560 Fury's. Would it be $20 premium? A $630 air cooled Fury X vs a WC $650 Fury is just pointless.
The price gaps would be much wider if the ref model is to be a WC version. THAT would basically make the WC version a halo part for that particular product.
Knowing NV, they'd probably charge $100 over the air versions of the same Chip. I think AMD wanted to have more wiggle room but the pesky GTX 980 Ti price made their cards slot basically within $100 of each other and thus have no space to really move.
How I'd see NV do it using imaginary products:
Ref 980 Ti WC - $750
Ref 980 Ti Air - $650
Which would make sense, but then we'd see:
Custom 980 Ti WC - $770+
Custom 980 Ti Air - $670+
Which still makes sense, giving users options. But in that we're already paying $100 on top (ie that NV premium). Which is why using the current Fury X as a basis is a little off since I doubt AMD wanted to have just a $100 difference between their water cool full chip and air cut-chip. Makes Nano hard to slot in there too.
Had Fury X launched first, I wouldn't be surprised if the prices were more along what we saw during predictions:
$750 WC Fury X
$600 Air cooled Fury
$450 Nano
There was plenty of room for those performance/price spots (Nano still questionable) IF the top were still that absurdly priced Titan X. NV would have been able to slot in at the $700+ price point too with 980 Ti, and they love them some monies so it would have done it just to put pressure on the slower Fury X.
But that's just me wasting my time pondering what ifs.
EDIT: Third parties are also making it harder to justify the at cost price for water cooling. Using the EVGA Hybrid's, it's $100 over ref. You can buy a bracket and cooler for less and DYI with the same results. The fact that EVGA basically did this as the fan on the pump is not controlled by the GPU sensor, it's just powered by it. Unless you wanna get all MacGyver haha.
If AMD offered an Air version for Fury X, what would the price be? $600? I think at that point they invalidated the $560 Fury's. Would it be $20 premium? A $630 air cooled Fury X vs a WC $650 Fury is just pointless.
The price gaps would be much wider if the ref model is to be a WC version. THAT would basically make the WC version a halo part for that particular product.
Knowing NV, they'd probably charge $100 over the air versions of the same Chip. I think AMD wanted to have more wiggle room but the pesky GTX 980 Ti price made their cards slot basically within $100 of each other and thus have no space to really move.
How I'd see NV do it using imaginary products:
Ref 980 Ti WC - $750
Ref 980 Ti Air - $650
Which would make sense, but then we'd see:
Custom 980 Ti WC - $770+
Custom 980 Ti Air - $670+
Which still makes sense, giving users options. But in that we're already paying $100 on top (ie that NV premium). Which is why using the current Fury X as a basis is a little off since I doubt AMD wanted to have just a $100 difference between their water cool full chip and air cut-chip. Makes Nano hard to slot in there too.
Had Fury X launched first, I wouldn't be surprised if the prices were more along what we saw during predictions:
$750 WC Fury X
$600 Air cooled Fury
$450 Nano
There was plenty of room for those performance/price spots (Nano still questionable) IF the top were still that absurdly priced Titan X. NV would have been able to slot in at the $700+ price point too with 980 Ti, and they love them some monies so it would have done it just to put pressure on the slower Fury X.
But that's just me wasting my time pondering what ifs.
EDIT: Third parties are also making it harder to justify the at cost price for water cooling. Using the EVGA Hybrid's, it's $100 over ref. You can buy a bracket and cooler for less and DYI with the same results. The fact that EVGA basically did this as the fan on the pump is not controlled by the GPU sensor, it's just powered by it. Unless you wanna get all MacGyver haha.
Last edited:
5150Joker
Diamond Member
I don't see NVIDIA releasing a reference water cooler anytime soon, especially with their focus on power savings. They'll continue letting their board partners do that (e.g. EVGA) to help differentiate the product stack.
RS gets what I'm trying to get at with this thread although I will admit, it's MY fault for just poorly wording the thread to start.
By having a better reference cooler (stock or WC), AIBs are FORCED to do better now. Having a reference blower terrible cooler so that your AIBs are able to differentiate makes 0 sense. I couldn't CARE LESS if there were ZERO models from AIBs, if the reference cooler was the best bar none. I don't know why so many people in this thread are worried about AIBs. If AIBs can't compete with the reference design... then why would you want their design in the first place?
As RS has shown, even if WC was standard, air designs would still be wanted by MANY users.
On the highend though, the point is, I shouldn't be able to spend $650, and get a reference GTX 980Ti. It just shouldn't happen.
Considering how good the R9 300 reviews were compared to the R9 200 reviews, I expect AMD will drop reference cooling on their products EXCEPT for their BEST coolers. Fury's MSRP is $550, you can get the best cooler out for $570 on it. That's a $20 premium for an AMAZING cooler. Competition is great, but currently, when I look at the PC market, I'm just NOT impressed at the coolers usually and it takes EFFORT to find a good one.
If AMD is smart, they'll continue this trend into Arctic Islands of no reference coolers and best coolers out. The market probably won't notice it as fast as they should, but I think it's a good step.
By having a better reference cooler (stock or WC), AIBs are FORCED to do better now. Having a reference blower terrible cooler so that your AIBs are able to differentiate makes 0 sense. I couldn't CARE LESS if there were ZERO models from AIBs, if the reference cooler was the best bar none. I don't know why so many people in this thread are worried about AIBs. If AIBs can't compete with the reference design... then why would you want their design in the first place?
As RS has shown, even if WC was standard, air designs would still be wanted by MANY users.
On the highend though, the point is, I shouldn't be able to spend $650, and get a reference GTX 980Ti. It just shouldn't happen.
Considering how good the R9 300 reviews were compared to the R9 200 reviews, I expect AMD will drop reference cooling on their products EXCEPT for their BEST coolers. Fury's MSRP is $550, you can get the best cooler out for $570 on it. That's a $20 premium for an AMAZING cooler. Competition is great, but currently, when I look at the PC market, I'm just NOT impressed at the coolers usually and it takes EFFORT to find a good one.
If AMD is smart, they'll continue this trend into Arctic Islands of no reference coolers and best coolers out. The market probably won't notice it as fast as they should, but I think it's a good step.
It's a fair point to ask for an improved cooling solution when spending $650 on a GPU. Like many other people when I grabbed a 980 TI I had to pay a few % extra to get the one with an improved/quieter cooler.
Now if you want AMAZINGLY cooled cards like your prior post, I think you should build a custon water loop. Now buying fancy cards with fancy coolers is good and fine but you can build something with better performance, customized aesthetics and a little bit more satisfaction doing it yourself.
Now if you want AMAZINGLY cooled cards like your prior post, I think you should build a custon water loop. Now buying fancy cards with fancy coolers is good and fine but you can build something with better performance, customized aesthetics and a little bit more satisfaction doing it yourself.
But even in a more conventional mini ITX case (i.e., let's say someone wants to use it as an HTPC in their living room), the poor airflow often forces gamers to go with a blower reference card like so:
But since a reference 980TI's blower goes to 50+ dBA, it makes it frustrating to try to build a quiet living room HTPC for your 4K gaming PC/monitor! After all, not all PC gamers desire to game on a 32" and below monitor at a desk. Having reference WC CLC flagship cards with factory warranty opens up a lot of potential for even more PC gamers moving from their man-cave into the living room since they will be able to fully utilize their > 40" 4K HDTV without requiring to sacrifice performance and noise levels, which today isn't possible in a small-form factor HTCP without going full custom WC loop.
As someone with a EVGA SC+ 980ti in a Corsair 250d, I can't imagine trying to cram a WC'd video card into that case. It would just dump the same amount of heat into the case from the front to get sucked out by my cpu loop's fans.
E.g.
I'd love to see some kind of improvement in the blower style exhaust coolers. But I'm not sure how we could.
n0x1ous
Platinum Member
- Sep 9, 2010
- 2,574
- 252
- 126
I disagree I shouldn't have to sit and build my own custom loop. That fury sapphire card has an amazing cooler for a $20 premium. Between that card and the fury x it's clear you can offer great cooling without a significant price premium.
This thread worries me though since if nvidia does nothing to improve their coolers it means their market position is so secure that they're only competing against themselves.
The fan on fury x has low rpms so can have front CLC blow out of front (vented panel would probably help). The smaller card would allow intake from side and I would also reverse fans in back to direct air into case for cpu cooler\CLC.
You are thinking as the consumer, not as Nvidia nor their partners. The question posed was if Nvidia will do it, not whether we want it.
Nvidia wants their partners happy, and their partners are not likely going to be happy if you just destroy all their years of work on their specialty coolers by making the reference design better. You may not care, but they do. Unless Nvidia just wants to get rid of their partners, and sell directly, I do not expect them to do anything but an occasional halo product with a high end WC setup until it is necessary to keep things under control.
Why quote me if you won't even read my post....
Considering I wrote the thread I know the question posed, it helps to read the post you're responding to before responding to it/quoting it.
As someone with a EVGA SC+ 980ti in a Corsair 250d, I can't imagine trying to cram a WC'd video card into that case. It would just dump the same amount of heat into the case from the front to get sucked out by my cpu loop's fans.
E.g.
I'd love to see some kind of improvement in the blower style exhaust coolers. But I'm not sure how we could.
The setup that works well for me is push pull on the CPU radiator blowing inside. Basically bringing cool fresh air inside. If I had a GPU loop I'd do the same. But put 2x140mm fans on the top for exhaust. It also creates positive internal pressure to do it this way.
I use a Titan X. The reference cooler on that is a POS. It is noisy beyond belief. My previous 980 with the MSI cooler was amazing in comparison.
The only way I can live with this card is that I have located the gaming PC about 25ft away in another room using HDMI over Cat5. Since I can't hear it I run it with 100% fan speed while gaming. I get pretty good overclocks close to 1500MHz stable. However should I decide to connect it to a monitor and use it while seated in the same room it would be like a vacuum cleaner were running. Worse even than a first gen Xbox 360.
The only way I can live with this card is that I have located the gaming PC about 25ft away in another room using HDMI over Cat5. Since I can't hear it I run it with 100% fan speed while gaming. I get pretty good overclocks close to 1500MHz stable. However should I decide to connect it to a monitor and use it while seated in the same room it would be like a vacuum cleaner were running. Worse even than a first gen Xbox 360.
RussianSensation
Elite Member
- Sep 5, 2003
- 19,458
- 765
- 126
That is an interesting point you bring up. From the partners point of view it would be very hard to differentiate (aka Titan X, Fury X are more or less all the same) but I'd rather have AIBs offer lifetime warranty, game bundles and so on like we had in the past. I remember with my GTX470s I got Mafia 2, Cryostasis, Metro 2033, Just Cause 2, etc. If the reference cooler is already stellar, I'd much rather choose a bunch of free games + lifetime warranty.
I am starting to think NV doesn't want to use WC for reference at all since the Titan Z was a thermal throttling mess and NV must have known that this is the case in real world testing but didn't bother caring.
Source
I think NV could create 1 more tier of Uber flagship card with fully unlocked core (aka Titan X), gimped double-precision, but because of that very high factory clocks and WC CLC. I think a lot of enthusiast gamers would pay $999 for it instead of an air cooled Titan X successor that will have more useless VRAM that doesn't benefit gamers for the most part. I think if there was a poll on how gamers would like for NV to improve their $999 offering, I bet most of them would much rather choose highest GPU clocks possible + WC CLC vs. how the Titan series is currently designed which is low clocks with a blower.
As someone with a EVGA SC+ 980ti in a Corsair 250d, I can't imagine trying to cram a WC'd video card into that case. It would just dump the same amount of heat into the case from the front to get sucked out by my cpu loop's fans.
E.g.
I'd love to see some kind of improvement in the blower style exhaust coolers. But I'm not sure how we could.
Also a 10.1 inch reference Titan X is about the biggest card you can fit into most cube mini ITX cases. The fact that there are aftermarket entry level cards like GTX 750s, 950s, 960s longer than that blows my mind.
My memory may be a little foggy but I think HIS had an excellent blower on the 7950, but I think most people saw the picture (or brand) and passed due to that exact reputation of a reference looking card.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814161420
This case is vented on all of the sides except for the top and bottom. Rear can only fit 80mms and it's pointless to bother as they'd be noisy and restrictive.
After looking at the example I posted and my current space, I could put the 120/140 at the front and vent out the front most likely. I just don't know how aggressively I could bend tubing from a video card with my about 1.5" of clearance from the side of the video card to the top of the case.
My actual internals for reference;
How would people with the NCASE M1/2 do anything if that's where we're headed with true ITX cases.
There's no way I'm making the cpu rad get blown across my motherboard. Having to switch which side of my desk this thing was on because I was melting from the cpu exhaust out the side, I'm not at all going to push that amount of hot air back into the case.
That kind of madness just boggles my mind. I was browsing EVGA's site today, why would a 950 need anywhere near that kind of cooling?
Take into account the actual card is only a little longer than motherboard (for Fury X, maybe pascal is shorter\longer) in pic. The water tubes also come from back of the card so shouldn't have any problems with tubing. Intakes would be vent on video card side and back vents. PSU with fan on bottom would be optimal in this case.
EDIT: Haha, now you have me looking at the 350D case for XF\SLI. No point in huge case like current 800d with CLCs and no optical drives.
Last edited:
railven
Diamond Member
- Mar 25, 2010
- 6,604
- 561
- 126
Again, I think you fail to understand WHERE AMD got stuck. No one is saying the option shouldn't be available to the user. I feel people are saying Watercooled should be left to AIBs, not Nvidia-Ref [EDIT: AMD and NV should be focusing on making money, period. AMD did Fury right by not offering a ref model and leaving it to the AIBs which delivered an amazing product. Why should AMD (and in turn Nvidia) waste their resource when a greater portion of buyers should look at custom designs from the start (unless specifically requiring ref PCB models.)] However, trying to cite Fury X as an example of what a Watercooled Ref card should cost in a product stack ignores the fact that AMD got stuck between a rock and a hard place.
Just answer this question:
Do you think had AMD launched first that the Fury X would have cost $650?
If yes, why? Remember the price points where $550 980's and $1,000 Titan X's.
Last edited:
Keysplayr
Elite Member
- Jan 16, 2003
- 21,219
- 55
- 91
Nvidia seems to be doing just fine with conventional air cooling. Be it heat pipes or vapor chambers, they don't seem to have any real need for water cooling. I think if they keep their focus on performance for power consumed and efficiency, they will have no use for water cooling. They may of course offer it, or the board partners will, like the GTX980Ti hybrid has been.
Reread my post again and focus on the Sapphire Fury card then. Answers your question.
A better reference cooler is possible. Or offer NO reference cooler and ensure your AIB coolers are up to par on your high end products. I am not hung up on WC, hence why I edited my OP and mentioned the Fury Sapphire card. Having loud crappy coolers on high end products is ridiculous though.
And AIB partners didn't match a cooler like the Fury X. So I'm not sure if leaving it to AIBs is the "best" solution if they struggle to even compete with Fury X's cooler. If AMD can get a cooler like that launched, why do AIBs seem to struggle so hard with WC products? Look no further than the PowerDevil WC card to see what I'm talking about.
As long as the cards in the future are laid out like the Fury X, sure. Shouldn't be too much of a problem. But those AIBs for the 950s... no idea what the partners are thinking.
But, but, case size is directly proportional to the size of your... :awe:
Last edited:
railven
Diamond Member
- Mar 25, 2010
- 6,604
- 561
- 126
What does Fury have to do with my question? My question is specifically tied to an option you feel is a better product, and it affects the actual cost of the Fury itself. If you don't answer my question - we can't address the Fury on it's own:
Hint: If the Fury X cost MORE, the Fury would also cost MORE.
I addressed this in my post.
"They struggle?" EVGA's water option was better without pump issues than AMD's own solution. It took AMD a few weeks/month to fix their product in channels. I quoted a review from the same guy that bought retail Fury X and retail 980 Ti Hybrid - they were "this is the most annoying product I've ever owned" versus "absolutely quiet."
And you aren't looking wide enough if you only think Hybrid kits from EVGA are the only option.
Corsair Brackets:
http://www.corsair.com/en-us/cooling/gpu-cooling
+
Any Corsair Cooler:
http://www.corsair.com/en-us/cooling/cpu-coolers
Or
Kraken G10 Bracket:
https://www.nzxt.com/product/detail/138-kraken-g10-gpu-bracket.html
+
A wide range of coolers:
If all you're focusing on is a "out of the box experience," then yes there are a very limited option of superior water cooling options to buyers.
If you want to twist this to "air coolers" there are a handful of very good coolers that come at MSRP OR even a few dollars over MSRP. [EDIT: I imply by this that ref models should only really matter to people looking for a red PCB specific board. A "smart" buyer would always pick a custom card after some research. Example - me, not being a hardcore NV guy I didn't know EVGA SuperClocked cards are ref PCB or the Zotac Amp was ref PCB board. Had I known, I would not have bought a ref Zotac.]
Where I think I lost you is, you changed your position mid-way through your post but failed to acknowledge the challenge of your initial premise. Some of us don't live on the forum and follow the comments based on the original premise. If you rather focus now on air coolers or "no ref cooler" that is a completely different subject since it no longer even includes Fury X which is actually the freaking title of the thread.
Last edited:
RussianSensation
Elite Member
- Sep 5, 2003
- 19,458
- 765
- 126
Mainly because of NV's AIBs, not NV, unless we conclude that most of their customers game with headphones on reference cards, are deaf, are all running 3-4 flagship cards in SLI, etc. The reference blower 980TI/Titan X cooler is very poor for cards that costs $650-1000.
Sapphire's Tri-X Fury cooler blows both of them completely out of the water on a $550 card. That's the point some are making here that for a $650+ level of card, the reference blower isn't good enough and people are finally speaking up.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter