Soldato
- Joined
- 30 Nov 2011
- Posts
- 11,440
I meant cases of product, like boxes of 10, not PC cases 
We never sold singles of anything
We never sold singles of anything
-
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.
** XFX SMASHING IT UP: RADEON FURY ONLY £359.99 Inc. VAT!! **
- Thread starter Gibbo
- Start date
I meant cases of product, like boxes of 10, not PC cases
We never sold singles of anything
We sell lots of singles due to dealing with end-users, though our distribution arm does of course ship via pallet and containers.
Soldato
- Joined
- 6 Feb 2010
- Posts
- 14,582
I'm a bit confused...the Fury is lower spec than the Fury Nano, so why is it that people getting so excited about it being at this price 
I'm a bit confused...the Fury is lower spec than the Fury Nano, so why is it that people getting so excited about it being at this price
could be down to the cooling but benchmarks i have seen puts the fury slightly ahead of the nano
Soldato
- Joined
- 6 Feb 2010
- Posts
- 14,582
Yes but that's because of the at stock setting the Nano throttle the clock speed by design due to keeping the power-consumption below 175W; up the power-limited, and the clock speed would stop throttling (provided if you can keep the GPU temp below a certain temp with a good airflow case).
Soldato
- Joined
- 6 Feb 2010
- Posts
- 14,582
Nano has the potential to be like 95%+ of Fury X performance, provided that the clock speed doesn't get throttled due to voltage restriction from the power limit or too high temp.
cool...
Might sell my two 290x and grab a nano... No games can run crossfire anyway so might aswell lol
Soldato
- Joined
- 6 Feb 2010
- Posts
- 14,582
I wouldn't do it even for my single 290x
As tempting as Nano is, I don't think it is worth upgrading to a 28nm GPU graphic card this point in time. Also the 4GB memory "may" become a limitation, especially if going VR.
I may be getting a 4K HDR TV sometime in the future as well, so I would definitely wait for next gen.
I wouldn't do it even for my single 290x
As tempting as Nano is, I don't think it is worth upgrading to a 28nm GPU graphic card this point in time. Also the 4GB memory "may" become a limitation, especially if going VR.
I may be getting a 4K HDR TV sometime in the future as well, so I would definitely wait for next gen.
You have a point.
a single 290x manages Dark souls 3 at 30fps so its not that bad. (4k)
Soldato
- Joined
- 2 Jan 2012
- Posts
- 12,251
- Location
- UK.
Im not, i don't think 4GB is enough, you would be mad to buy a card with only 4GB now, thats just imo.
Yeah but remember you don't understand the difference between GDDR5 and HBM, I would take 4GB HBM over 8GB+ GDDR5 anyday.
It's also about how fast the memory can cache needed files and then discard them, not needing as much space. HBM does this much more efficiently than GDDR5.
I've been using a 4GB HBM card for the past few months @ 1440P, and have tried all the cards, 970, 980, 980 Ti and Titan X. The Nano is by far my fav card from this gen. Take if from somebody who actually has tried these things out, rather than just speculates.
By the time 4GB HBM isn't enough, we will likely have way more advanced cards anyway and looking at 4K/8K resolution. This price VS a GTX 980 which only has '4GB GDDR5' btw, is a great price.
Last edited:
Permabanned
- Joined
- 12 Sep 2013
- Posts
- 9,221
- Location
- Knowhere
Totally pointless. You should just be getting the X and adding a block to that, I can't understand why people are going Nano and watercooling it.
Removing the noise & temps does not make it match an FX because of the power limitations. If it could match an FX it would not be cheaper. I wouldn't buy a Fiji card now but if I did I'd go with the Fury over the Nano. If the XFX model is anything like my Tri-x it is a cool quiet card and when you look at all the different Pro's now available they are all keeping to 3 fan designs, There must be a reason for that, Why not 2 fans? It'd still be double what the Nano has but they do not do it.
No, If you want a Fiji chip to stick a waterblock on there's only one good option and that's to get the full powered X. I bet there isn't a single watercooled Nano PC out there that couldn't of fit an X in it and had better performance for it.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 8 Jul 2003
- Posts
- 30,063
- Location
- In a house
Why would you buy a Fury X and a block, when you can get a Nano and a block for much cheaper, which you can then just whack the paltry 50MHz drop on the core back onto
Last edited:
Permabanned
- Joined
- 12 Sep 2013
- Posts
- 9,221
- Location
- Knowhere
Why would you buy a Fury X and a block, when you can get a Nano and a block for much cheaper, which you can then just whack the paltry 50MHz drop on the core back onto
It's not that clear cut.
I just dug up some 3dmark results and this compare shows the fastest nano result available while both the Fury X and Fury pro results are from about 3/4's of the way down each cards first page. I did that to ensure they were not LN results plus you can see they're obtainable clocks.
http://www.3dmark.com/compare/fs/7871307/fs/8215014/fs/6742510#
A'll I'm saying is that I can see no reason why an enthusiast would go with a Nano rather than a Fury X when he means to waterblock it anyway. The only reason a Nano makes sense (to me) is if I was trying to build a really small rig that a basic Fury X won't fit in to (because of the rad) and if I didn't care if it was a bit noisy under load. And personally if I was trying to build something that small it would be because I want something to hide away and not know it was there. IMO that's currently not possible.
People keep saying this yet I have to turn textures down on some games even on a 1080p screen running 1440 vsr. My 4 gb's of HBM doesn't seem to be enough ? How many results from Fiji chips are on the ROTTR benchmark thread? I would guess it's still none cause if there are any they haven't been done with the correct settings. I was getting results where minimums had a minus before the number ffs.
Last edited:
