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

[ICDP]

SDRAM and RAMBUS are two different types of memory but 4GB is 4GB.

Yeah, I'm going to go ahead and refer you to this. Hopefully you will pick up the fact I am wary of the fact that 4GB HMB might not be enough.

So it might be possible that 4GB GDDR5 is not enough for 4K but 4GB HBM is.

 

[mmj_uk]

Having 0.5GB memory on a GTX970 accessed at between 22GB/s-75GB/s is terrible but apparently when the Fury has to go over a 8-16GB/s PCI-E bus it's fine because HBM.

Yeah, I'm going to go ahead and refer you to this. Hopefully you will pick up the fact I am wary of the fact that 4GB HMB might not be enough.

I might walk on water tomorrow.

 

[agent00x]

Having 0.5GB memory on a GTX970 accessed at between 22GB/s-75GB/s is terrible but apparently when the Fury has to go over a 8-16GB/s PCI-E bus it's fine because HBM.

Well, we have proof that the first statement is terrible. The 2nd statement we do not have proof yet, but we shall find out when the benchmarks get produced.

 

[Mei]

ye you guys are going to keep going around in circles until ppl get to benchmark them lol

 

[ICDP]

I think they would have made more a lot more of it if it fundamentally redefines memory requirements. Why ignore the elephant in the room?

I most certainly am not ignoring the elephant in the room. In my experience 4GB is fine for 4K now, there is enough evidence to show it may be a limiting factor very soon. Hence my reluctance to get overly excited about the 4GB Fury X until reviews surface.

 

[Boomstick777]

Please can this thread be closed? In favour of moving to a more sensible thread here >>>>>>>> http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showthread.php?t=18676801

 

[skaif]

Someone care to summarise in a separate thread? Too much jumbo mumbo here to make sense of anything!

 

[Nutella33]

Having 0.5GB memory on a GTX970 accessed at between 22GB/s-75GB/s is terrible but apparently when the Fury has to go over a 8-16GB/s PCI-E bus it's fine because hbm

Good legitimate comparison.

 

[Treznor]

I'm currently in the market for the GTX 980 TI Hybrid or the Fury X. I just want a good performing card that is reasonably quiet.

Currently have 7970 in crossfire and whereas the performance is mostly fine at 1080p, the noise these fans generate is getting annoying as I'm getting older, so a far quieter cooling system like the AIO cooler will suit me just fine.

Once we have some reviews and we can then compare, I will then make my decision on which one to purchase, like I'm sure the vast majority of people will do.

 

[FinglisHobbit]

Some posts here are getting so tedious.

Its a strange mentality that people seem to have. Its like people always try to justify their choices by questioning the choices of others.

When I buy something I set myself a budget (often spend above it ) , I research what is going to be best for said budget, then I make the purchase, content that it suited me.

I dont feel the need to trawl forums posting drivel about other cards that I didnt buy or had no intention of ever buying.

Its like buying a Ford Mondeo then going into a Vauxhall forum to tell them all how my horsepower compares to theirs. Its all rather silly.

 

[ICDP]

I might walk on water tomorrow.

No you absolutely will not, I can guarantee it. On the other hand re HBM, without seeing reviews it will be impossible to jump to any conclusions on how 4GB HBM memory will handle 4K.

I am prepared to give it the benefit of the doubt, while you seem heavily invested in declaring any and all AMD tech "failed".

 

[Andy321]

All these expensive GPU's hard at work rendering this webpage I'm off to play a game

 

[drunkenmaster]

Having 0.5GB memory on a GTX970 accessed at between 22GB/s-75GB/s is terrible but apparently when the Fury has to go over a 8-16GB/s PCI-E bus it's fine because HBM.



I might walk on water tomorrow.

The problem is Nvidia intentionally lied to reviewers, tech sites and THEIR CUSTOMERS. Had they been honest people could have chosen to get a 970 but dropped settings to not go beyond the 3.5GB limit. AMD didn't mislead or lie to anyone about how much memory is on the card.

People were irked about the lying and the questionable implementation method, the cards were advertised as having 4GB and X amount of bandwidth, in reality it simply wasn't true that you could access ANY of that memory with that amount of bandwidth, but the bandwidth accessing that last portion was ridiculously slower as well.

The situations aren't even remotely comparable.

 

[TwsT]

nvm

 

[TonyTurbo78]

ninja edit there TwsT

 

[oldestgregg]

Some posts here are getting so tedious.

Its a strange mentality that people seem to have. Its like people always try to justify their choices by questioning the choices of others.

When I buy something I set myself a budget (often spend above it ) , I research what is going to be best for said budget, then I make the purchase, content that it suited me.

I dont feel the need to trawl forums posting drivel about other cards that I didnt buy or had no intention of ever buying.

Its like buying a Ford Mondeo then going into a Vauxhall forum to tell them all how my horsepower compares to theirs. Its all rather silly.

This. Also the "you must be gutted you bought a TX/Ti" posts. Why? I bought it to game on and AMDs cards are not going to make mine run any slower are they

 

[Nutella33]

.The situations aren't even remotely comparable.

Nor is his example, given the 9 series all use the pcie interface as well! If he actually compared apples to apples it would be fury's 520GB/s vs the 970s - 22-75GB/s of the 0.5GB