R9 Nano - AMD says that it has too few review samples for the press.

nashathedog · 5 Sep 2015 at 22:46

Kaapstad said:
I am starting to suspect the Nano has some serious flaws or lack of performance that sites like TPU would expose.

Having said that I think the Fury X and Fury P are very good cards indeed.

It's Fury Air as in Nike Air not P that's so last gen

Kaapstad · 5 Sep 2015 at 22:59

nashathedog · 6 Sep 2015 at 00:06

Edit 2

fs123 · 6 Sep 2015 at 00:09

Gregster said:
It's because I have had the top AMD card

So your 'review' where you said the FuryX was a good card was all BS and a lie?

You are failing miserably at your attempt to appear impartial like in your sig..

Gerard · 6 Sep 2015 at 00:12

Seems odd that hardocp is being exempt from getting a review unit. Last year amd had Kyle Bennett at an even talking about how well crossfire was being supported. Fast forward to now and the sites being excluded from review samples. :confused:

Just seems a bit childish that a tech company is playing these games, if websites aren't able to give their opinions for fear of not getting review units then whats the point in them? Only report good things or you get blackballed? :confused:

Orangey · 6 Sep 2015 at 00:30

Dicehunter said:
Nah it's just people who have no idea about business or simply don't care and are there simply for the money and want to bleed the company dry because to them it's just a piggy bank

http://www.benzinga.com/analyst-rat...nalyst-on-amds-executive-bonuses-unbelievable

They're making some good moves but the desktop execs might need to hit the bricks based on recent events.

edit: saw this as well

http://www.benzinga.com/news/15/08/5774774/mid-day-market-update-tuesdays-top-shorted-stocks
http://online.wsj.com/mdc/public/page/2_3062-nasdaqshort-highlites.html

fs123 · 6 Sep 2015 at 00:38

Gerard said:
Seems odd that hardocp is being exempt from getting a review unit. Last year amd had Kyle Bennett at an even talking about how well crossfire was being supported. Fast forward to now and the sites being excluded from review samples.

Just seems a bit childish that a tech company is playing these games, if websites aren't able to give their opinions for fear of not getting review units then whats the point in them? Only report good things or you get blackballed?

It's because Hardocp insists on using mainly Gameworks games in their tests which not doubt make AMD cards look bad compared to Nvidia's. They seem to have a pro-Nvidia vibe so no wonder AMD gave them the middle finger.

Kaapstad · 6 Sep 2015 at 00:45

fs123 said:
It's because Hardocp insists on using mainly Gameworks games in their tests which not doubt make AMD cards look bad compared to Nvidia's. They seem to have a pro-Nvidia vibe so no wonder AMD gave them the middle finger.

I really don't like Hardocp reviews as they are way to messy with their carrots to grapes comparisons.

KillBoY_UK · 6 Sep 2015 at 00:46

fs123 said:
It's because Hardocp insists on using mainly Gameworks games in their tests which not doubt make AMD cards look bad compared to Nvidia's. They seem to have a pro-Nvidia vibe so no wonder AMD gave them the middle finger.

even if that was true giving cards to "pro AMD" sites is just as bad. if you had a great product you want to to shove it in as many hands as possible and rub in the faces of as many "pro nvidia" sites as you can

ps I think think site bias is blow out of proportion like a lot of things

Kaapstad · 6 Sep 2015 at 00:50

KillBoY_UK said:
even if that was true giving cards to "pro AMD" sites is just as bad. if you had a great product you want to to shove it in as many hands as possible and rub in the faces of as many "pro nvidia" sites as you can

ps I think think site bias is blow out of proportion like a lot of things

Biggest problem with a lot of err tech sites is they are not very good at benching stuff and make some terrible basic errors.

Gerard · 6 Sep 2015 at 00:58

fs123 said:
It's because Hardocp insists on using mainly Gameworks games in their tests which not doubt make AMD cards look bad compared to Nvidia's. They seem to have a pro-Nvidia vibe so no wonder AMD gave them the middle finger.

A pro nvidia vibe yet they invited the owner of the site to talk about crossfire and how it was better than sli at that time?

People seem to accuse sites of bias regardless of how balanced they are.

Rroff · 6 Sep 2015 at 01:04

mmj_uk said:
They should just scrap the liquid cooling system and allow partners to release Fury X with aftermarket coolers, not only will it solve the issue of whining pumps but it'll knock a significant amount off the price.

Yeah should have just got the AIBs or whoever to stick their own flavour of cooling on - some would probably go with cheap and nasty

but atleast some of the bigger brands would have done it justice.

LoadsaMoney · 6 Sep 2015 at 01:14

JediFragger said:
More than a week they've been there, shocking! People are just scared to get a whiner (or have already been burned, such as Loads). I must admit if I was buying an AMD card today I'd go for the Fury Pro, wouldn't want the possibility of a noisy card

Yep, the pros the one to go for

Kaapstad · 6 Sep 2015 at 01:15

Rroff said:
Yeah should have just got the AIBs or whoever to stick their own flavour of cooling on - some would probably go with cheap and nasty but atleast some of the bigger brands would have done it justice.

+1

If a Fury P can run on air then so can a Fury X.

If AIB partners were allowed to do this then the Fury X would be sold at a much more competitive price which in turn would lead to greater demand.

Having said that the AIB partners would have to be careful with the cooling used as the Fury X is very sensitive to temps so good air cooling would be needed.

Erik13 · 6 Sep 2015 at 01:34

Lol i knew that hardocp with their pro nvidia review style will be excluded. Nice move from amd what do you expect from sites graphic card reviewer that usually mocks amd in forums ?

razorpakk · 6 Sep 2015 at 01:40

Who hasn't mocked AMD in the past year?

chroniclard · 6 Sep 2015 at 10:21

Jono8 said:
I am not really sure why you would buy a Fury X over a 980Ti at this point in time, especially when they are more expensive and 980Ti's are on sale often at under £500.

The only plus i can see is the liquid cooler but then that is offset by the noise problems with them. I would rather just have a 980Ti with a very quiet/silent air cooler than have to put up with that pump whine i have heard on videos here.

Price needs to drop well below 500 and it would actually look a pretty attractive card. Even more so in Crossfire as AMD's scaling at the moment is pretty epic.

JediFragger · 6 Sep 2015 at 10:51

razorpakk said:
Who hasn't mocked AMD in the past year?

The ones getting the cards?

fs123 · 6 Sep 2015 at 11:03

chroniclard said:
Price needs to drop well below 500 and it would actually look a pretty attractive card. Even more so in Crossfire as AMD's scaling at the moment is pretty epic.

I agree, but it looks like the shortage of HBM, etc means they are unlikely to drop prices for at least a few more months. AMD seems to be competitive in the £170-£300 segments so probably aren't too worried about FuryX supply just yet.

Once the arctic Island cards are ready I would expect them to have larger quantities ready on launch.

setter · 6 Sep 2015 at 11:19

The AIO is the thing that put me off the fury x, I like things clean and simple. Hence my choice of an aftermarket cooled Ti. With AIO coolers, too much more to go wrong. That and the fact that a company has to fit an AIO means that the card runs quite hot so they cannot manufacture a standard cooler capable of dealing with it. Aka a cop out.