Interesting. Do I sense a bit of a falling out between OCUK and AMD?
Not really
Most benching is done at 1080p or lower where the Fiji cards are not good.
Fiji cards are great at higher resolution where the HBM really shines.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/fc608/fc608ab6e6dc2469165c10f9a8cb020731d10c69" alt="Smile :) :)"
Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.
Interesting. Do I sense a bit of a falling out between OCUK and AMD?
Not really
Most benching is done at 1080p or lower where the Fiji cards are not good.
Fiji cards are great at higher resolution where the HBM really shines.![]()
Not at all. LN2 Overclocking is no brands priority all this stuff has to be figured out and tested. No one has yet tried with Fury X. I asked some questions but AMD themselves did not test sub zero at all.
For me more efficient drivers should be and is there priority.
Most gaming is also done at this res also.
Ian have you had a go with any of the Fury chips on LN2 ?
My gut feeling is they are not good for benching but very good for 2160p gaming.
The vrm's on fury x are supposedly good for 150c. Its on one of the reviews though i can't remember which, it was brought up after the thermal image surfaced.
According to people who know their CHiL/IRs from their OnSems, the voltage regulator on Furys is exactly the same, class-leading component as on 290/390 cards, so the problem waiting to be solved lies somewhere else.
According to people who know their CHiL/IRs from their OnSems, the voltage regulator on Furys is exactly the same, class-leading component as on 290/390 cards, so the problem waiting to be solved lies somewhere else.
I agree in that Fury Is a bit of a puzzle at the moment. Everything seems to point towards something not being right but if its not playing ball with the systems we have in place already its hard to pin it down. If that makes sense.I had read similar that the components on the card are top notch.
I'm curious to know if it's more along the lines of HBM being more sensitive too temps, and it is mounted almost directly on the chip, thereby possibly limiting the temps they can put out?
The whole thing to me just seems odd, that they would claim an OC dream, then impede the ability to do it. Perhaps it's a case of a business decision overrode what the engineers thought? (Been there.. done that... etc).
Fair enough. Sorry I was a bit tartNutella: Yes another Fury thread. I didn't want to trash the review thread, or the owners thread with discussion on a topic that had the potential to be quite debated.
^^ Just AMD being AMD IMO they always talk things up and for some reason people generally let them get away with it - while I sit back in disbelief that people have already forgotten the last time.
I agree in that Fury Is a bit of a puzzle at the moment. Everything seems to point towards something not being right but if its not playing ball with the systems we have in place already its hard to pin it down. If that makes sense.
Fair enough. Sorry I was a bit tart*does stonemason handshake*
What company doesn't "talk up" their products? I can't think of any offhand that go "yeah our products are meh, buy them if you want, we don't care". Pretty daft comment to make really.
There is talking up a product and then there is Bulldozer levels of talking up a product...
What company doesn't "talk up" their products? I can't think of any offhand that go "yeah our products are meh, buy them if you want, we don't care". Pretty daft comment to make really.
Everyone has failures that isn't what I'm talking about.