• 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.

Possible Radeon 390X / 390 and 380X Spec / Benchmark (do not hotlink images!!!!!!)

Status
Not open for further replies.
Rockstar did an amazing job with GTAV but frustratingly I think thats gonna be the pinnacle of what we get on PC for the next 2 years. (and we are talking about a remastered game here, nothing new)

I'm holding out on these new cards because I do plan on buying a high end gaming card so I can get 60fps at 1440p. But when I think about it the games that really utilise the power will be completed within a week or so and Ill be just waiting out for that next big game.

By then Pascal will be on the market.

Its been years since Ive been following the GFX card market like this. Its a shame that there isn't a wealth of upcoming games to put them to use.
 
Boomstick777 said:
I think people buying Titan X is less about the exact 12GB of vram but more about wanting the absolute best single GPU, that's why I bought it for example. I would have been happy with 8GB and a cheaper price tag.

An 8GB Fiji card would be phenomenal, but the 4GB card might surprise us. HBM is new territory and I think we should all wait for legit reviews / benchmarks and actual user experience before people condemn it.

I'm really looking forward to seeing these at E3, and now I know AMD didn't show the Fury I am 100% convinced it beats the Titan X. I will be going back to the red team if this is the case, my relentless pursuit of best single GPU continues through the years :D
Click to expand...

The 980 Ti massively dents prospective Titan X owners but the card nevertheless still fills an important niche. Its for people who buy two or more and play at 4K, where they most definitely have enough grunt to use more than 6 GB VRAM.

But this is what's disappointing about the prospect of 4 GB Fury. Cross-firing them is waste of time.
 
Ron Myers apparently said:

"the requirement for 8GB (or whatever) is in combination with the current, slower bandwidth."

Meaning that 4GB's of extremely high bandwidth HBM might indeed be enough for gaming. It could deal with things very differently VS slower GDDR5.

We just need to wait and see before we condemn.

Mayh3M said:
But this is what's disappointing about the prospect of 4 GB Fury. Cross-firing them is waste of time.
Click to expand...

Consider that with DX12 memory can be pooled, i.e 2 x Fiji cards with 4GB gives a total of an 8GB frame buffer. Crossfire might not be as pointless as you think going forward. The future is DX12 and these new cards are designed with the future in mind.
 
Last edited:
africanos23 said:
A GTX980 would be enough for most games @ 4K with low-medium settings (no AA) I could run 4K with GTX680s (2GB on low settings ) the older games you can probably max out even with AA.

Lacking grunt would mean anything from 15-35 FPS I suppose ? VRAM bottleneck you are going to be playing "smooth" 25 FPS for example but then get single digit frame drops with GPU usage dropping to 0%.
Click to expand...

Yeah I thought as much. Thing is though that's not an accurate picture of the requirements of VRAM for gamers who want to play at higher settings at 4k. To be fair, I'm talking ultra enthusiast here - people who are going to use AA for sure.
 
24th, when the graphics cards hit the stores

Reveal and reviews on the 16th.

http://www.kitguru.net/components/g...v/amd-teases-fiji-but-refuses-to-reveal-fury/

wunkley said:
Don't be daft. That would render 200+ pages of pointless drivel, even more pointless :)
Click to expand...

Lol (:

SimBy said:
It's kinda weird they don't wanna show the card since repi already showed it on twitter :p
Click to expand...

They have shown Fury 'Fiji cutdown' , up and running performance but not to press. Fury X has not been shown (Makes me believe this is faster than TX, and expensive, very expensive), performance is unknown. Reveal and reviews on the 16th June. Retail availability from the 24th June according to that article.
 
Last edited:
Boomstick777 said:
They have shown Fury 'Fiji cutdown' , up and running performance but not to press. Fury X has not been shown (Makes me believe this is faster than TX, and expensive, very expensive), performance is unknown. Reveal and reviews on the 16th June. Retail availability from the 24th June according to that article.
Click to expand...

Are you sure the Guru3D article was talking about the Fiji card specifically? I re-read it and it's not clear whether the performance demo they saw was of Fiji or Fury.

The comments in that article assume the latter.

Edit: just saw you referenced a different article. Interesting.
 
Last edited:
Boomstick777 said:
24th, when the graphics cards hit the stores

Reveal and reviews on the 16th.

http://www.kitguru.net/components/g...v/amd-teases-fiji-but-refuses-to-reveal-fury/



Lol (:



They have shown Fury 'Fiji cutdown' , up and running performance but not to press. Fury X has not been shown (Makes me believe this is faster than TX, and expensive, very expensive), performance is unknown. Reveal and reviews on the 16th June. Retail availability from the 24th June according to that article.
Click to expand...

I have a feeling AMD know the Titan X is faster and are scrabbling around or delaying it's release until 980Ti sales settles down a bit.
 
Boomstick777 said:
They have shown Fury 'Fiji cutdown' , up and running performance but not to press. Fury X has not been shown (Makes me believe this is faster than TX, and expensive, very expensive), performance is unknown. Reveal and reviews on the 16th June. Retail availability from the 24th June according to that article.
Click to expand...

Even if 20% more powerful than the TX what's the point , crossfire drivers are poop :D
 
So, 205 pages and we have (talking about the Fury X or not the Fury X)

  • 4GB but could be 8GB
  • Called the Fury X but unofficial
  • Comes with AIO but AIB's might do an air cooler
  • Faster than a Titan X but might be competing against a 980
  • 4GB is all you need for any resolution but 4GB isn't enough for 1080P
  • This will be expensive but could be cheap
  • Releasing on the 16th but might not be the 16th

So with that in mind, I think we know everything about this card now :p

ohhhh, it will be HBM of some description HBM or HBM 2.0
 
Boomstick777 said:
Ron Myers apparently said:

"the requirement for 8GB (or whatever) is in combination with the current, slower bandwidth."

Meaning that 4GB's of extremely high bandwidth HBM might indeed be enough for gaming. It could deal with things very differently VS slower GDDR5.
Click to expand...

That's marketing fud then because once you run out of local memory and paging to main memory occurs the frame-rate will tank regardless of local memory type. HBM wont magically change the limitations of the PCI-E bus.

Also, this is also why NVidia thought it was a good idea to have 0.5GB of slow memory on the GTX970, as slow as accessing that 0.5GB is compared to the full speed memory it's still much faster than going over the PCI-E bus to main memory.
 
Last edited:
Gregster said:
So, 205 pages and we have (talking about the Fury X or not the Fury X)

  • 4GB but could be 8GB
  • Called the Fury X but unofficial
  • Comes with AIO but AIB's might do an air cooler
  • Faster than a Titan X but might be competing against a 980
  • 4GB is all you need for any resolution but 4GB isn't enough for 1080P
  • This will be expensive but could be cheap
  • Releasing on the 16th but might not be the 16th

So with that in mind, I think we know everything about this card now :p

ohhhh, it will be HBM of some description HBM or HBM 2.0
Click to expand...


Nice recap :P
 
Boomstick777 said:
Ron Myers apparently said:

"the requirement for 8GB (or whatever) is in combination with the current, slower bandwidth."

Meaning that 4GB's of extremely high bandwidth HBM might indeed be enough for gaming. It could deal with things very differently VS slower GDDR5.

We just need to wait and see before we condemn.



Consider that with DX12 memory can be pooled, i.e 2 x Fiji cards with 4GB gives a total of an 8GB frame buffer. Crossfire might not be as pointless as you think going forward. The future is DX12 and these new cards are designed with the future in mind.
Click to expand...

Neither the theory that having high bandwidth memory or that two 4GB cards will be able to pool their memory work.

The high bandwidth of HBM doesn't work because it allows you to rapidly get data out of the VRAM but doesn't help with getting new data across the much slower PCI-E bus into the VRAM. No amount of GPU to VRAM memory bandwidth is going to fix this in any significant way.

For the same reason crossfire cards sharing data doesn't work as you can't go fishing across the PCI-E bus, it's an order of magnitude slower. Both cards are going to need very similar information in their framebuffers. Unless they use a very high bandwidth bus between the cards (which I haven't seen mentioned) this is never going to work. 16 PCI-E 3 lanes gives you 32GB/s of bandwidth iirc compared to HBMs 512GB/s.
 
Last edited:
Gregster said:
So, 205 pages and we have (talking about the Fury X or not the Fury X)

  • 4GB but could be 8GB
  • Called the Fury X but unofficial
  • Comes with AIO but AIB's might do an air cooler
  • Faster than a Titan X but might be competing against a 980
  • 4GB is all you need for any resolution but 4GB isn't enough for 1080P
  • This will be expensive but could be cheap
  • Releasing on the 16th but might not be the 16th

So with that in mind, I think we know everything about this card now :p

ohhhh, it will be HBM of some description HBM or HBM 2.0
Click to expand...

Haha. I've only been into PC gaming/tech for half a year, but what I will say is that the rumour mill, especially just before the launch of a card, seems to be really accurate when it comes to GPU specs.

We were told months ago this would have an AIO and 4 GB HBM, both of which were debated hotly back then. They are pretty much a given now.
 
We know when the cards the coming, I think we can all just wait now before jumping on AMD.

AMD are trying some genuinely new innovative technology, they are the first to HBM and also the first (In partnership with PC Gamer) to create a PC event for E3. These are pretty big things tbh.

Can't help but think AMD deserve more credit than they get. I will reserve my judgement on the new cards until I can actually judge them by reviews and benchmarks. If they suck then fair enough, but that will be then. Throwing them under the bus before we even have reviews / benchmarks is foolish.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom