And if you see that once you tend to become sceptical... Intel followed that up with the core line... gives them a bit more credibility next time they talk a product up.
-
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
And if you see that once you tend to become sceptical... Intel followed that up with the core line... gives them a bit more credibility next time they talk a product up.
Well it doesn't help with things still being stuck on 28nm, Hawaii was already a hot running chip, Fiji is less so but still hardly ideal. With a bit of luck the next lines are on a better process and open up more options.
The thing is AMD didn't have to mention an overclockers dream, they could have said something thr coolest, quietest GPU in the world for 4K gaming. Sure that is chocked full of caveats but no one would have batted an eye lid upon release. Instead they find themselves under a pile of bad publicity, no voltage control and poor overclocking at stock is just another small piece on a string of launch issues. No 3rd party voltage control at launch is perfectly normal but don't say overclockers dream if you dot. Provide a first party solution. And if you make such claims to be surprised when people scratch their heads when most people seem to shuffle to get an extra 70MHz while the competitor cards really are overclockers dreams.
At the Ned of the day it is a minor issue but they just made it a bigger issue by their marketing decisions.
At the Ned of the day it is a minor issue but they just made it a bigger issue by their marketing decisions.
Caporegime
Well I have done loads of testing and 50Mhz over stock is my stable overclock. It tok me 3 attempts to complete my Valley run at 1120Mhz but several runs at 1100Mhz was fine. That in truth is disappointing and I can't see much more happening when the voltage is unlocked.
Soldato
- Joined
- 6 Feb 2010
- Posts
- 14,582
At least they didn't print it on the box of the product as part of the feature/specification
Soldato
- Joined
- 30 Nov 2011
- Posts
- 11,381
At least they didn't print it on the box of the product as part of the feature/specification
Under UK law, if someone makes a marketing statement that is "misleading" you have 90 days to cancel the contract. Doesn't matter if it is on the box or not.
Associate
He said 275W consumption and 500W cooler. This to me implies that it will take voltage well. So we will see how it goes when the OC software will be available. Just as i need some +V on my 290X even at 1100mhz, but as i raised the voltage it reached 1280mhz.
Last edited:
I dont understand why they launched though in this state with the
amount of cards being returned, how did the cooler design pass testing process ? surely they must have known that a large % of the cards they were sending out had this glaring defect ?
amount of cards being returned, how did the cooler design pass testing process ? surely they must have known that a large % of the cards they were sending out had this glaring defect ?
Soldato
they would have obviously known about the "whine" issue, but I'm sure realised they had to get it out ASAP to try and combat Nvidia total dominance. If this card came out 6 months ago, it would have been a whole different story right now. oh well, another few months wait to get rid of these 7950's lol
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.).
All cards launch without voltage control. AMD & NV both leave it up to 3rd party community tools.
Why are AMD having to suffer this ignorance?
It's possible that AMD were targetting GTX980 and would have released Fury X with a much more conservative clockspeed, then when 980Ti was announced they had to scramble and clock it much closer to the limit. Why they have locked off voltage I can only assume it's due to their HBM implementation.
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 19 Feb 2011
- Posts
- 5,849
Probably because they went on record to say it's an Overclockers dream, if they had known it wasn't they should have kept their mouths quiet.
It's ignorant if they released it with that statement without checking first if it was actually true.
I'm fairly sure they would have tested it in their labs with varying overclocks, but you are right to an extent it's not fair to lay the blame solely on them, however that bold statement is something enthusiasts will take to heart and put a lot of stock in and if it turns out to be false it will reduce their already frail credibility further
Caporegime
Maybe they meant it was just a dream and not reality.
Caporegime
'Overclockers Nightmare' is more apt 
I'm not sure I will be getting rid of mine for at least 6 months yet. I benched Tombraider and am getting min 102, average 134 at the same settings as the bechmarks on Tweaktown, only my cpu is clocked higher @4.7Ghz vs 3.6Ghz for theirs. Maybe the Fury needs a faster cpu to show it's true power but I'm still amazed that I can get close to a 980ti with my lowly 7970/7950 crossfire (in this game at least).
Last edited:
Please, stay on topic.
Will be very nice if this is true. Apart from the HBM is the tech pretty much the same as the 290x/390x?
It's not ignorant, I'm attempting to resolve/answer a specific statement made by someone at AMD. The card 'could' turn out to be an overclockers dream, but presently that is NOT happening, hence the topic I started.
It has been noted that the Fury/Fury X do not do well at lower resolutions (i.e. 1080p). That graphs change significantly in Fury/Fury X's favour as the resolution gets higher.