Man of Honour
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.
-
Competitor rules
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.
"Overclocks Dream" The Fury X
- Thread starter Scougar
- Start date
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.
OcUK Staff
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.
Most gaming is also done at this res also.
Fair enough, just seems like a bit of a .... lack of communication so far.
Are you going to be the first to play once unlocked or will you await AMD's testing/comments? You seemed keen prelaunch? I dont know the professional scene much so I cant say im au fait with standard procedures
OcUK Staff
I don't need them to help to be honest. But like I say much time to figure out and mod. Maybe little benefit or not competitive.
At some stage I will try yes.
At some stage I will try yes.
Man of Honour
I am looking to the future and 1440p or 2160p.
I don't think I could go back to 1080p gaming after using 2160p for quite a while.
I think HWBot should look at doing Firestrike @8k for benching as it really tests the memory on the cards.
LN2 with the exposed interposer could be fun :S
150C is the absolute max at that temperature it invokes TSD until temperature drops below 130C. 125C is the highest recommended junction operating temperature with a mean failure of just 1000 hours - compared to something like 50,000 hours at 105C.
Last edited:
The way I see it is as follows
AMD bodged up big time reasons below
They have a card which only performs great at low/medium 4k resolution above this 4gb HBM is no good no matter how much they say it is. To counter this AMD need 8gb HBM and voltage control and their promise of an overclockers dream.
The card performs worse at lower resolution's, I means that's the first I have heard of a GPU doing that.
AMD is putting the final nails in its coffin. AMD you better do a buy one fury get one free offer.
AMD bodged up big time reasons below
They have a card which only performs great at low/medium 4k resolution above this 4gb HBM is no good no matter how much they say it is. To counter this AMD need 8gb HBM and voltage control and their promise of an overclockers dream.
The card performs worse at lower resolution's, I means that's the first I have heard of a GPU doing that.
AMD is putting the final nails in its coffin. AMD you better do a buy one fury get one free offer.
Interesting! cheers for that
Prefer LT myself.
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).
Nutella: 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.
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).
Nutella: 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.
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.
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
Honestly, I almost felt it was the white elephant in the room with it being mentioned here and there, but no discussion as the topics always moved on to nvidia vs amd vs matrox vs 3dfx 
I don't know how everyone else feels, but it makes me uneasy with them not giving the ability. Even if it isn't the case, it makes you wonder if something is being held back for problematic reasons, opposed to something silly like thermal limits being increased exponentially.
Maybe they just got nervous at the last minute with such a change in tech, they didn't want anything to ruin the party by people trying to max their cards without understanding the tech enough compared to the tech from the last few years.
(Secretly, I'm a little disappointed for AMD, as they only seem to have harmed themselves (sales) by locking things down - well, if you could actually buy a card that is.).
There is talking up a product and then there is Bulldozer levels of talking up a product...
Like Intel with the Pentium 4 and rambus and netburst?
Like nvidia with the fx series?
Like ati and the rage fury maxx?
Like Apple and the newton?
Companies always put hype behind things regardless if they know in the long run its not what they expected. A lot of stuff is based on predictions about how things will pan out but it might not be the case by the time its almost ready to go. How exactly this is an amd only thing is something i can only speculate is seen from behind green tinted glasses.
The difference is most companies can back up,what they say to a certain extent and have some basis in reality, at least relative to AMD who offer the the world whipped cream and a cherry on top but time and time again fail to deliver. And fen when they do have something that is pretty cool they always seem to mess it up or fail to deliver on it, or don't bother supporting it, or have terrible drivers, or don't support developers or have it constrained in a stupid way that should have easily, been rectified.
The lack of voltage control and poor overclocking on stock volts is classic AMD. Neither of those would be a bis issue yet they hyped up the "overclockers dream" rubbish so much at launch then what do they expect but egg on their face. The lack of HDMi2, non-existent stock and the pump whine are just more examples to taint their launch which they really needed to go flawlessly. Die hard AMD fans are getting bitten with the pump whine and moving to nvidia. The performance alone already saw far more 980TI sales than furyX's.
The FuryX is a good card and at high res is a reasonable competitor giving you a choice at 4k between vendors, assuming you don't game ona 4K TV. But you can't buy the damn things, and if you do get one theN the chances of pump whine seem unfathaomable. And then at the end of the die why both, the 980Ti can often be found cheaper and is faster, uses less power and is known to overlock very well. Real shame AMD got so close but didn't quite hit the spot.
Really? so pentium 4 and rambus and netburst weren't heralded as the second coming but fell way short of the mark, P4 in particular being hot and having a stupidly long pipeline that gave birth to the mhz myth with amd cpu's on shorter pipelines being slower in clock speed but faster in real world.
This is also the architecture that intel were crowing about being able to get to 10ghz with, maybe with a heatsink the size of a small car and a fan the size of the average jet engine.
Bottom line is the examples all had a lot of hype behind them and ultimately they didn't pan out as expected, something that the manufacturers knew long before putting them on shelves. Fury is still an unproven overclocker, when voltage options become available it might open up a decent bit more performance, then again it might not.