@flopper said:
AMD marketing mistake big time as how bad can they be at their jobs?
total amateurism
AMD marketing mistake big time as how bad can they be at their jobs?
total amateurism
AMD Radeon R9 Fury X Reviews
@Jawed said:
RMA your noisy pumps!
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-r9-fury-x-power-pump-efficiency,4215.html
RMA your noisy pumps!
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-r9-fury-x-power-pump-efficiency,4215.html
@Chalnoth said:
I have found this video card launch to be more interesting than any launch in a while. The HBM tech is really amazing. The cooler design is also pretty innovative.
But ultimately, this launch was extremely disappointing. The Fury X at best trades blows with the 980 Ti (in some reviews, it does consistently worse), and with higher power consumption. The cooler's noise problems have also been disappointing (though solvable: buy a card in a few weeks to months and I'm sure it won't be an issue). It's awesome that we have a card that is not significantly louder when it is in heavy operation than when it is at idle, and that the idle noise isn't too terrible (when the cooler is working properly). But combining HBM and this amazing cooler and not being able to beat the 980 Ti is really unfortunate. It makes me think that AMD spent too much time on the design of the memory and not enough time figuring out how to make best use of the additional memory bandwidth. Here's hoping that the next designs from AMD and nVidia that use this kind of memory technology are much better-balanced.
I have found this video card launch to be more interesting than any launch in a while. The HBM tech is really amazing. The cooler design is also pretty innovative.
But ultimately, this launch was extremely disappointing. The Fury X at best trades blows with the 980 Ti (in some reviews, it does consistently worse), and with higher power consumption. The cooler's noise problems have also been disappointing (though solvable: buy a card in a few weeks to months and I'm sure it won't be an issue). It's awesome that we have a card that is not significantly louder when it is in heavy operation than when it is at idle, and that the idle noise isn't too terrible (when the cooler is working properly). But combining HBM and this amazing cooler and not being able to beat the 980 Ti is really unfortunate. It makes me think that AMD spent too much time on the design of the memory and not enough time figuring out how to make best use of the additional memory bandwidth. Here's hoping that the next designs from AMD and nVidia that use this kind of memory technology are much better-balanced.
@Gregster said:
Guys, I was the author of the original video and after speaking with several people, there is something up with my setup or at least there was. Everything is correct and present now and all settings are identical. I was very new to using a capture card as well and hence a few silly errors.
I have since redone the video's and the IQ is identical as far as I can tell.
That is one of the many vids I have done and feel free to give it a once over
Guys, I was the author of the original video and after speaking with several people, there is something up with my setup or at least there was. Everything is correct and present now and all settings are identical. I was very new to using a capture card as well and hence a few silly errors.
I have since redone the video's and the IQ is identical as far as I can tell.
That is one of the many vids I have done and feel free to give it a once over
@3dilettante said:
The design process for the memory standard would need to be decoupled from graphics development. Hynix wouldn't appreciate AMD saying that it had to make a standard meant to be used as an industry standard less useful because it needed to figure out its graphics IP--unless we count HBM1 as being that compromise. The foundations laid down for HBM would have been decided before the realities of GPU stagnation at 28nm really hit.
The design process for the memory standard would need to be decoupled from graphics development. Hynix wouldn't appreciate AMD saying that it had to make a standard meant to be used as an industry standard less useful because it needed to figure out its graphics IP--unless we count HBM1 as being that compromise. The foundations laid down for HBM would have been decided before the realities of GPU stagnation at 28nm really hit.
@Razor1 said:
Thank you Gregster, nice overclock btw on the Titan X.
Guys, I was the author of the original video and after speaking with several people, there is something up with my setup or at least there was. Everything is correct and present now and all settings are identical. I was very new to using a capture card as well and hence a few silly errors.
I have since redone the video's and the IQ is identical as far as I can tell.
That is one of the many vids I have done and feel free to give it a once over
Thank you Gregster, nice overclock btw on the Titan X.
@Gregster said:
Thanks but there isn't any overclock on it. It is the EVGA SC Titan X. It will sit at 1430Mhz 24/7 and my Fury X will sit at 1100Mhz (both stock volts). I will get round to doing some overclock results soon
@CarstenS said:
I didn't even know it was necessary to mention such an implicitness, but: Of course we do and test all cards at HighQuality filtering settings in the respective drivers.
@3dilettante said:
Transient issues can hit any system with as many factors as a gaming rig. That you took feedback, invested the extra time to re-test, and provided the output is very much appreciated.
Transient issues can hit any system with as many factors as a gaming rig. That you took feedback, invested the extra time to re-test, and provided the output is very much appreciated.
@Ryan Smith said:
It's not really your fault. The problem is that Battlefield 4 is a complete and utter pain to test. It does a lot of things behind the scenes that aren't obvious (or don't make a lot of sense), it automatically adjusts draw distance based on VRAM, it's LOD system isn't great, and for that matter even when things work right its texture use can leave something to be desired. At the end of the day it's not a very good test for image quality, though it's always good to have someone checking it anyhow.Guys, I was the author of the original video and after speaking with several people, there is something up with my setup or at least there was. Everything is correct and present now and all settings are identical. I was very new to using a capture card as well and hence a few silly errors.
I have since redone the video's and the IQ is identical as far as I can tell.
That is one of the many vids I have done and feel free to give it a once over
@silent_guy said:
(I'm sure a bunch of webmasters are thankful as well: these kind of controversies are great at creating traffic! )
Thanks for the clarification!
(I'm sure a bunch of webmasters are thankful as well: these kind of controversies are great at creating traffic!
)
@Chalnoth said:
I really hope that the next generation of HBM cards do a much better job of making use of the additional headroom.
I won't speculate as to what the impact on the memory standard might have been if AMD's engineering management had a somewhat different focus, but whatever the situation it seems really clear that they didn't make optimal use of the additional bandwidth. It might have been better, for example, if they had waited on implementing HBM until their next architecture and instead gone with a more traditional setup this time around.
I really hope that the next generation of HBM cards do a much better job of making use of the additional headroom.
@CarstenS said:
The picture looks suspiciously like the R9 390 Strix that I have lying here on my desk. That includes the placement and curvature of the heatpipes, which would most probably be somewhat different due to Fijis larger package compared to Hawaii. Additionally, I don't think we'll see a DVI-equipped Fiji card (at least in the first batch).
To be perfectly clear: The original source of these pictures has a third one available, which would make it perfectly edit: no, make that painfully obvious, that this is indeed R9 390 Strix, not Fury. But of course wise guys at WTF tech has omitted that one for credibility.
So, please wait until it's at least double confirmed(tm)
The picture looks suspiciously like the R9 390 Strix that I have lying here on my desk. That includes the placement and curvature of the heatpipes, which would most probably be somewhat different due to Fijis larger package compared to Hawaii. Additionally, I don't think we'll see a DVI-equipped Fiji card (at least in the first batch).
To be perfectly clear: The original source of these pictures has a third one available, which would make it perfectly edit: no, make that painfully obvious, that this is indeed R9 390 Strix, not Fury. But of course wise guys at WTF tech has omitted that one for credibility.
So, please wait until it's at least double confirmed(tm)
