28nm : Why Nvidia overclocks better??

[Deleted member 13524]

The thing with the Fury X's lack of voltage controls is just another one of AMD's weirdest, craziest moves we've seen as of late.

First there's this slide:

Then there's the "overclockers' dream" statement.
And for what? A 5-10% possible overclock on the core alone?

Why did they provide the card with dual 8-pin PCIe power connectors for a total of 375W of available power on a card that consumes 100W less? Why did they get such an expensive watercooler in there that keeps the card below 60º C on load and is supposed to dissipate up to 500W?
Voltage controls should've been there on day one, and all of AMD's statements and showings prior to the launch indicated that much.

But nope, let's get all the factory-overclocked 980 Ti models with even more headroom get all the enthusiast sales instead. That makes sense.

 

[tabs]

From my thoroughly scientific sample size of 1, I'd say that even the reference 980ti overclocks pretty damn well. I slapped 10% on the core and it runs great with no voltage increase (also bumped the memory speed by 300mhz). Fan gets a bit louder than usual, but it's fine and certainly not noisy like some of the cards I've had in the past.

 

[silent_guy]

The thing with the Fury X's lack of voltage controls is just another one of AMD's weirdest, craziest moves we've seen as of late.

And even if they release some SW later on to allow voltage controls (similar to releasing the 7970 GE or seriously improving the 7970 driver performance 6 months after release), the reputation damage has already been done.

The FuryX marketing strategy deserves a place alongside the one that was used for the next generation Osborne computer.

 

[flopper]

The thing with the Fury X's lack of voltage controls is just another one of AMD's weirdest, craziest moves we've seen as of late.

First there's this slide:

Then there's the "overclockers' dream" statement.
And for what? A 5-10% possible overclock on the core alone?

Why did they provide the card with dual 8-pin PCIe power connectors for a total of 375W of available power on a card that consumes 100W less? Why did they get such an expensive watercooler in there that keeps the card below 60º C on load and is supposed to dissipate up to 500W?
Voltage controls should've been there on day one, and all of AMD's statements and showings prior to the launch indicated that much.

But nope, let's get all the factory-overclocked 980 Ti models with even more headroom get all the enthusiast sales instead. That makes sense.

Marketing and its presentation was awful even bad.
the cast was stressed and not calm and balanced. needs coaching
It should all been about PC gaming and the Fury.
A balanced pricing was needed a $600 or $625 for Fury X as that would given better reviews and recomendations
A wet dream and whoever said that dont know what customers think or do obviously.
I buy card cant overclock it??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
Its a desert dream no water and no sex.

They did at AMD pretty much everything wrong in their Fury presentation.
Its beyond me how they are able to even survive.

 

[gongo]

I feel if Dave was still working on this....he would have looked at the internal benchmarks and strongly argued against marketing it as a Fury X...he will want it to be a 390X, set a 1Ghz core clock and reduced the price to $599. At least we are than guaranteed of a 100+Mhz overclock..which looks a little nicer psychologically. We would also have custom AIB boards coming soon, instead of a locked down Fury X.

This new AMD team...they may have high qualifications and whatnot, but are out of touch with the ground sentiments and expectations...

This team....why are they still silence about new drivers improvements and voltage unlocked overclocking..?? Are they going to let the AMD fans buy Fury X on false hopes?

 

[Alexko]

The thing with the Fury X's lack of voltage controls is just another one of AMD's weirdest, craziest moves we've seen as of late.

First there's this slide: (snip)

Then there's the "overclockers' dream" statement.
And for what? A 5-10% possible overclock on the core alone?

Why did they provide the card with dual 8-pin PCIe power connectors for a total of 375W of available power on a card that consumes 100W less? Why did they get such an expensive watercooler in there that keeps the card below 60º C on load and is supposed to dissipate up to 500W?
Voltage controls should've been there on day one, and all of AMD's statements and showings prior to the launch indicated that much.

But nope, let's get all the factory-overclocked 980 Ti models with even more headroom get all the enthusiast sales instead. That makes sense.

The 8-pin connectors are probably required, because while average power is 275W, the card can go a bit above 300W from time to time. The water cooler keeps the card very quiet and very cool, which saves a few watts by reducing leakage and makes (small) overclockings easy. That the cooler can handle 500W mostly just makes it able to handle 275~350W easily, quietly and while maintaining low temperatures.

 

[Deleted member 13524]

The 8-pin connectors are probably required, because while average power is 275W, the card can go a bit above 300W from time to time.

The 290X consumes more than the Fury X, it also goes beyond 300W at its peak and all models - including the factory overclocked ones - bring 6pin+8pin connectors.

The cooling and voltage regulation systems were clearly designed with overclocking in mind. And when the card was released, the overclocking options were nowhere to be seen. Perhaps something went wrong with the hardware..