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

Mtom · 9 Jun 2015 at 20:07

Ayahuasca said:
I hope the AMD lads who aren't used to paying halo tier prices for the top card have their wallets ready if it's 10% faster than a TX.

I guess we'll see a lot of hypocrites outed with this launch

I'm waiting for this

After changing 3 290X one after another, it costed me more than this will

chaosophy · 9 Jun 2015 at 20:08

mulpsmebeauty said:
I'm still hoping the Fury Pro comes in at £500 and competes with the 980ti. I don't want to pay the gsync premium for my next monitor.

Similar here. I'm hoping I can hit a sweet spot of £1,000 for a step up* to a 1440p, 120/144Hz monitor with a card with enough grunt to do that res with a high enough frame rate to make use of the refresh. And also enough grunt to play a few pad/console type games on a 4k TV where I could probably live with a locked 30fps - though ideally nearer 60.

Currently though it just seems to be over that, nearer the £1,200+ mark. :/

(* - from 1080p, 120Hz, 7970)

Mtom · 9 Jun 2015 at 20:08

Martini1991 said:
I don't understand how this thread works.
One minute it's all negative, the next minute it's all "IT'S A WORLD BEATER".

Is everyone trolling or something?

You missed the link mate? http://wccftech.com/amd-radeon-fury-x-specs-fiji/#ixzz3canXpplY

Squink · 9 Jun 2015 at 20:11

itchy said:
HBM is real game changer.

DDR is a street of bungalows, you have to go out the door walk down the street a little to the next house/drawcall.

HBM 4 story building, you want next draw call just do down/upstairs.

But residents of both have to queue to get over the bridge

Silent_Scone · 9 Jun 2015 at 20:11

Suddenly WCCF are credible because the news is positive, you see.

Brumboy · 9 Jun 2015 at 20:11

Looks very promising. If these specs are true then I look forward to seeing the gaming benchmarks. The only thing that was/is holding me back from buying this card is the 4GB memory, I don't want to be limited by that for 4k gaming.

But then again HBM could make a big difference and stop that 4GB memory from hindering it's 4k performance.

Excited for next Tuesday anyway!

jux_D · 9 Jun 2015 at 20:14

wccftech are reputable all of a sudden?

Lokken86 · 9 Jun 2015 at 20:15

I'm still sceptical of that website but if it's true sign me up for a Fiji pro mmmm.

LoadsaMoney · 9 Jun 2015 at 20:15

Rossuk89 said:
The only thing that was/is holding me back from buying this card is the 4GB memory

What about the terrible driver support

Boomstick777 · 9 Jun 2015 at 20:15

mulpsmebeauty said:
Whichever way you look at it, 4Gb puts a time limit on the card more than 6Gb (12gb is pointless). This seems to be the only question mark over the card at the moment.

Unless HBM does something super special to overcome the limitation. I'm aware this has been discussed at great length and generally thought to be unlikely.

Yeah you have a point there, need to see how 4GB HBM limits or doesn't limit higher resolution before making judgement though.

When AMD have good products they can command a good price, it's fair enough. I don't expect a Titan X beater to be cheap. If performance is similar (But not better) than a lil bit cheaper would make sense.

But if the card beats the Titan X, and HBM doesn't hold it back. It still wouldn't surprise me to see people expecting it to be cheaper than a 980 Ti. It's just the way most think about AMD. That is the mindset, it's not just Martini, unfortunately just the mindset about AMD. Even if it's better it needs to be cheaper to lol.

eyetrip · 9 Jun 2015 at 20:17

I'm still not sure I understand how people think 4gb of him will overcome memory limitations that 4gb ddr will have?

Once you go over 4gb, you will then need to swap from system ram either way, no?

Hence the bottleneck isn't the onboard ram but the system bus.

Boomstick777 · 9 Jun 2015 at 20:17

LoadsaMoney said:
What about the terrible driver support

Nvidia aren't doing to great on driver support either atm.

Imho both camps could do better, there is no better company. Just go with whoever has best hardware.

Lokken86 · 9 Jun 2015 at 20:18

eyetrip said:
I'm still not sure I understand how people think 4gb of him will overcome memory limitations that 4gb ddr will have?

Once you go over 4gb, you will then need to swap from system ram either way, no?

Hence the bottleneck isn't the onboard ram but the system bus.

There's meant to be some way of compressing the textures better or more efficiently so I hear.

Boomstick777 · 9 Jun 2015 at 20:19

eyetrip said:
I'm still not sure I understand how people think 4gb of him will overcome memory limitations that 4gb ddr will have?

Once you go over 4gb, you will then need to swap from system ram either way, no?

Hence the bottleneck isn't the onboard ram but the system bus.

Yeah this is true we've all discussed so many times though. We have to see if it actually does hinder the card at high res, or if it causes stutter when swapping from card to system etc.

All we can do is wait for reviews..

SimBy · 9 Jun 2015 at 20:21

LoadsaMoney said:
Air cooled on release as well, nice.

I'm just glad they finally dumped those awful radial coolers on air cooled versions. 3x Axial cooler should keep this thing cool and quiet.

Perfect_Chaos · 9 Jun 2015 at 20:23

Would be a poor show if AMD demonstrate performance but not prove 4GB HBM will be enough, they should run tests on games well known to take more vram than that to see how it does. If not we will have to rely on reviews.

Squink · 9 Jun 2015 at 20:25

Boomstick777 said:
When AMD have good products they can command a good price, it's fair enough. I don't expect a Titan X beater to be cheap. If performance is similar (But not better) than a lil bit cheaper would make sense.

If the 8gb Fury X (when it's released) is quicker than the Titan X, I expect it to have an eye watering price of £700+. The Titan X is just an outlier card that nVidia have stiffed their customers on by superseding it almost immediately (I don't say this because you own one

). I think the Fury X will be priced lower than the Titan X NOT because it's an AMD product, simply because this is how AMD will pitch it for their own business reasons.

Boomstick777 said:
But if the card beats the Titan X, and HBM doesn't hold it back. It still wouldn't surprise me to see people expecting it to be cheaper than a 980 Ti. It's just the way most think about AMD. That is the mindset, it's not just Martini, unfortunately just the mindset about AMD. Even if it's better it needs to be cheaper to lol.

I don't class the Titan X as the competition here. It's a vastly overpriced niche with too much VRAM. The 980ti is basically as fast as it, such that you wouldn't realise having the two running the same game side by side. AMD will be aiming to take sales from the 980ti and they'll do it by pricing their card more cheaply (unless it's really a lot faster). People have come to expect this behaviour from AMD, which is all good as nVidia gouges their customers enormously.

itchy · 9 Jun 2015 at 20:26

mulpsmebeauty said:
But residents of both have to queue to get over the bridge

The system memory bus might be a problem, but with ddr-4 getting to crazy speeds now with new boards and CPUs coming out soon. I don't think it will be much of a problem.

flopper · 9 Jun 2015 at 20:27

eyetrip said:
I'm still not sure I understand how people think 4gb of him will overcome memory limitations that 4gb ddr will have?

Once you go over 4gb, you will then need to swap from system ram either way, no?

Hence the bottleneck isn't the onboard ram but the system bus.

seems likely they have a 8gb card also.

Squink · 9 Jun 2015 at 20:28

Lokken86 said:
There's meant to be some way of compressing the textures better or more efficiently so I hear.

"Compression" was oft repeated as an excuse for the 980 only having a tiddler 256-bit memory bus. It was an unsatisfactory response for that card and I suspect the same will apply to the Fury.