AMD R9 Fury Nano Official Slides leaked

[Agost]

Aye, I spend a lot of time usually in the small hours chatting with the guys from AMD via Twitch, even they say "You ain't seen nothing yet" and "If you think that the Nano and Fury Pro are the end of this, you'll be surprised at whats still to come"

So it would seem they have some room left up their sleeves.

They're probably referring to the dual fiji GPU...

 

[Dicehunter]

Aye, I spend a lot of time usually in the small hours chatting with the guys from AMD via Twitch, even they say "You ain't seen nothing yet" and "If you think that the Nano and Fury Pro are the end of this, you'll be surprised at whats still to come"

So it would seem they have some room left up their sleeves.

Hopefully this also means we'll see voltage control from 3rd parties soon.

They're probably referring to the dual fiji GPU...

Nah not really, The dual card isn't anything really that special in all fairness, Just Crossfire Fury X's in a smaller package.

 

[SpencerUk]

Yeah it was a tight fit as by all logic Corsair say it wont fit haha but it has a few mm at the end of the card before it gets to the case and plenty of breathing room Idles at 11% fan and ramps to 30-34% max still cant hear it @52c

[/URL]

That looks a seriously seriously tight fit man. I guess this is where the R9 Nano comes in.

Aye, I spend a lot of time usually in the small hours chatting with the guys from AMD via Twitch, even they say "You ain't seen nothing yet" and "If you think that the Nano and Fury Pro are the end of this, you'll be surprised at whats still to come"

So it would seem they have some room left up their sleeves.

Maybe a price cut =00=

 

[NeverBackDown]

But the 980Ti has much more OC headroom than the Fury X...

If you consider the bigger OC headroom of maxwell cards ( and the ease of overclocking they have ) is it actually worth to wait for a card that will probably more expensive relative to its performance, with almost no OC headroom and in limited stock? Moreover custom versions of the Nano aren't going to be released until the end of the year, according to some leaks

https://community.amd.com/community...roducing-the-amd-radeon-r9-nano-graphics-card

Here AMD says nothing about the actual release date...


Don't think I'm a nVidia fanboy, I'm just a relatively conscious consumer. I'm criticizing AMD because I trusted them to bring some serious competition but it looks like they couldn't manage to do it

ANDs "limited" overclocking headroom isn't their fault in all fairness. The 3rd party vendors are taking their sweet time updating their software to recognize the correct sensors and stuff. It's probably down to stock and them not being able to get cards but who knows why.

With no voltage many fury x owners can get to at least 70mhz extra on the core to get about to 1120. That's pretty good for GCN. 290xs tended to need crazy amounts of volts just to get to 1150.

In regards to AMD bringing competition, no idea what benchmarks you are looking at but they sure did bring a whole lot of it. 390x is now on par with a 980, Fury is faster and same price as a 980, Fury X is on par with 980tis(not overclocked like crazy). They only fall short to the TX. The low end market with 960s the 380 is competitive too

 

[Zoot]

The price of the Nano is definitely higher than I thought. But then, is AMD really under any obligation to sell them at a lower price if they can sell all the cards they produce (given quantity will be limited) at a higher price? Any company would do the same.

The other thing is that they feel it warrants a premium given it's looking like it'll be the fastest ITX GPU around for a while.

I was in the market for a nice compact case that could take a full sized GPU lately and you soon realise there aren't many and most of them are enormous (like the Prodigy).

That's one thing that gets me about a lot of the enthusiast ITX cases. They're just stupidly large, some of them it's no stretch at all to a full blown ATX case.

 

[Agost]

ANDs "limited" overclocking headroom isn't their fault in all fairness. The 3rd party vendors are taking their sweet time updating their software to recognize the correct sensors and stuff. It's probably down to stock and them not being able to get cards but who knows why.

With no voltage many fury x owners can get to at least 70mhz extra on the core to get about to 1120. That's pretty good for GCN. 290xs tended to need crazy amounts of volts just to get to 1150.

In regards to AMD bringing competition, no idea what benchmarks you are looking at but they sure did bring a whole lot of it. 390x is now on par with a 980, Fury is faster and same price as a 980, Fury X is on par with 980tis(not overclocked like crazy). They only fall short to the TX. The low end market with 960s the 380 is competitive too

Agree on the 390X (partially)

But, at least here, both Fury and Fury X cost more than, respectively, 980 and 980Ti

Moreover they're in limited quantities and the X seems a bit behind the 980Ti even at stock clocks. And I'm not referring to 1080p or 1440p, even at 2160p

Again, not a fanboy, I'm stressing this because I'm kinda disappointed and really afraid AMD is going to disappear, if they can't manage to give some real concern to the green team ( and to the blue one, in terms of CPU )

Their market share is falling down... and in this market less money means worse future products and support

 

[Kungfugrip]

Hi everyone!

I am just throwing out reaction as I have been waiting on this card. I anticipated a much different beasty then we got.

Am I missing something here? Or did AMD just underclock a Fury X, remove the watercooler, add a HSF onto a slightly smaller PCB and slap the same price tag on it?

 

[Agost]

Hi everyone!

I am just throwing out reaction as I have been waiting on this card. I anticipated a much different beasty then we got.

Am I missing something here? Or did AMD just underclock a Fury X, remove the watercooler, add a HSF onto a slightly smaller PCB and slap the same price tag on it?

The PCB is slightly different, so are probably the VBIOS and the binning process

The core is the same. It is scheduled to be released on september 10

 

[NeverBackDown]

Agree on the 390X (partially)

But, at least here, both Fury and Fury X cost more than, respectively, 980 and 980Ti

Moreover they're in limited quantities and the X seems a bit behind the 980Ti even at stock clocks. And I'm not referring to 1080p or 1440p, even at 2160p

Again, not a fanboy, I'm stressing this because I'm kinda disappointed and really afraid AMD is going to disappear, if they can't manage to give some real concern to the green team ( and to the blue one, in terms of CPU )

Their market share is falling down... and in this market less money means worse future products and support

You say your not a fanboy a lot.. mostly when you say Nvidia is faster.. makes it seem you are lol

The fury x is probably the best 4k card, outside the TX of course. AMD gets hit less with performance loss at higher resolution. Adds up tbh. Now while I have seen AMD perform better than a 980ti for 4k. At 4k I'd say it's closer to a TX. A 980ti is game dependant but overall faster. Just calling it how I've seen it

 

[Kushiro]

People should really try locking the 980ti at its base clock against the Fury X at its base clock. OC vs OC my 980tis win hands down. Without OC.. Now thats a different story.

Fanboys can go "oh.. well thats only because AMDs card is clocked higher than it was meant to be" blah blah blah and how "nVidia can just bump up the clocks on the 980ti and destroy the Fury" yada yada yada. Well I dont care fact is both are good cards.

Cant manage to give some some real concern to the green team... Pfft.

Above is directed at you mister Im not a fanboy.

Is there even a 980ti in that size. I think not.

 

[Agost]

You say your not a fanboy a lot.. mostly when you say Nvidia is faster.. makes it seem you are lol

The fury x is probably the best 4k card, outside the TX of course. AMD gets hit less with performance loss at higher resolution. Adds up tbh. Now while I have seen AMD perform better than a 980ti for 4k. At 4k I'd say it's closer to a TX. A 980ti is game dependant but overall faster. Just calling it how I've seen it

I say it because I don't want to be considered a fanboy. TBH I had less driver issues with my old 5850 than with my current 670.

The fact is that most 980Ti sold are custom ones, not reference, which usually have at least 100 MHz more boost clock than the reference one just because of better cooling

So if the Fury X matches a reference 980Ti, it doesn't match a custom one

I've already explained why I'm stressing this

 

[NeverBackDown]

I say it because I don't want to be considered a fanboy. TBH I had less driver issues with my old 5850 than with my current 670.

The fact is that most 980Ti sold are custom ones, not reference, which usually have at least 100 MHz more boost clock than the reference one just because of better cooling

So if the Fury X matches a reference 980Ti, it doesn't match a custom one

I've already explained why I'm stressing this

Even custom 980tis are sometimes slower. It's really the few super binned one's that pull clearly ahead. Other than that, they are basically even. With limited samples of how far Fury Xs can clock, it's hard to compare are most reviews show tiny overclocks. Me and Dice afaik have clocked ours higher than most reviews

 

[SpencerUk]

From what I've seen the 980Ti is faster on 1080p currently but at 1440p/4k its pretty much tied.

 

[Kushiro]

Even custom 980tis are sometimes slower. It's really the few super binned one's that pull clearly ahead. Other than that, they are basically even. With limited samples of how far Fury Xs can clock, it's hard to compare are most reviews show tiny overclocks. Me and Dice afaik have clocked ours higher than most reviews

Just curious whether or not you went with a full cover block? As when I oc'd the Fury X I got up to 1187 Core however the vrms.. Well lets just say they werent doing as well as I had hoped.

Either way, I myself am no longer interested in the Fury's. Store I ordered from has fu**** up my order for the last time (I say this now, however unfortunately chances are I will have to order from them again, as they are pretty much the main store in AUS with the biggest range)

 

[NeverBackDown]

Just curious whether or not you went with a full cover block? As when I oc'd the Fury X I got up to 1287 Core however the vrms.. Well lets just say they werent doing as well as I had hoped.

Either way, I myself am no longer interested in the Fury's. Store I ordered from has fu**** up my order for the last time (I say this now, however unfortunately chances are I will have to order from them again, as they are pretty much the main store in AUS with the biggest range)

I'm just using the AIO atm. Mine only clocks to 1110-1115 depending on what, but Dice has clocked his at 1190 i think along with hbm at 550 iirc. My VRMS haven't had any issues so far.

You shouldn't get mad at the Fury if the store screws up. Just a bad company:/
I'd try and order like a pick up so no shipping involved if possible.

 

[Kushiro]

I wasn't mad at the Fury, its a great card. I am just giving up on the Fury because I wasn't all that interested in the first place and its not exactly something I need with my current setup. I only wanted get get 3 because I have a spare x99 rig that was originally housing my 290x stup until 2 of them died in an unfortunate car accident.

I didn't play around with the HBM as I was a bit wary of messing with something I didn't fully understand. Besides the memory should be alright without being touched.

Maybe the Fury my mate has just had poor contact with the VRM or something.. Amazing OC though, at least as I have seen.

I thought Dice had theirs at 1200?

 

[The_Governour]

with the price that AMD is asking is a BIG let down. Who would go this route when any 980ti ill beat it?

 

[AlienALX]

with the price that AMD is asking is a BIG let down. Who would go this route when any 980ti ill beat it?

AMD keep making up markets to dominate.

So basically Fury X dominates in the 4k market (or did for price at least but then Nvidia released the 980ti for £499) and so on. Problem is? no one uses 4k yet (there are exceptions to the rule because I actually do but the market is tiny).

So they've made Nano which is the smallest 4k card ever ! although see the issue above. So the ideas are good, they're just poorly thought out. I mean, 4k is great yes and so is the ability to have this tiny little card that can actually make games playable at 4k but now you add another predicament - who wants to build a tiny little computer with a 4k capable card in?

The only thing I pray AMD got right was that their cards are better at DX12 because they are designed for it and Nvidia seem to have dropped that ball.

Time is going to tell on that front but IMO? if it's not true and Nvidia do find a way around it AMD are in big trouble and they may not even live to see Zen.

I'm getting kind of annoyed at AMD continually coming up with products that make sense but only in their heads.

"Yeah so our IPC doesn't match Intel's and won't due to the budget we had, let's release an 8 core desktop CPU that on paper can easily beat the I5 but in reality is three years too early"

"I know ! let's make a large range of expensive GPUs for people to use at 4k even though there are (at the time of design) no decent, affordable 4k screens around !"

"I know, this one's even better ! let's make a tiny version of that card, cut it down so it only uses 175w and then give it a standard fan cooler yet still charge $649 for it ! We'll sell loads of the buggers !!!!1111oneoneelevenonehundredandeleven.