AMD Radeon R9 Nano Video Card PAPER Launch @ [H]

DASHlT said:
copied from that other thread:

Now I do not understand this decision from AMD. I know they are trying to keep as much positive reviews as possible. Now [H] reviews are different then everyone else's out there, and not all reviews of the Fury X were the same. Still doesn't make sense not to send review samples to major websites.

Now if Kyle did hangup on a Conference call because he was unhappy with the price of the Nano (which hell i think 99% of the people were), Then in a small/little sense yea I wouldn't want to send his ass a review sample as well. 1 of my biggest pet peeves is people hanging up on you. SPECIALLY in a business workplace that is a BIG HUGE NO NO. Now do we know for sure Kyle hung up on them? No one knows other then Kyle, but if he really did, then IMO I wouldn't of sent him a sample either. But I still think that doesn't look good in AMD's book.

If this becomes a huge PR nightmare for AMD, Just tell people the truth why they didn't send [H] a card.

Now just my 0.02c
Click to expand...

Why He hangup? He was going to buy it? He got an sff build? Hmmmm
 
Nenu said:
Whats wrong with you?
He hasnt said anything wrong and why do you care so much?
The review is coming, it would be better to await the results hey.


Click...
This isnt the review site you were looking for.
Proper gameplay and proving the true impact of gameworks clearly means nothing to you.
Click to expand...


Nothing's wrong with me. Brent is going on as if the 980Ti has some overwhelming lead over the Fury X. At most it's 10% and a little higher on games that have been gimped by Nvidia with their Crapworks (Gameworks) titles. You stick two identical systems side by side, with the only difference being one has a 980Ti vs the Fury X and I'd be surprised if 10% of people could tell the difference in game play on those systems.

About the only thing I can agree on with Brent or Kyle is that the price of the Nano and Fury X are definitely too high compared to their Nvidia counterparts. I wouldn't buy either card (Fury X/Nano) at their current price.
 
§kynet;1041834676 said:
Not this again. If you don't care about AMD products what are you doing here?
Click to expand...

You probably missed the part where I do have AMD cards.. :rolleyes:;)
 
Nenu said:
This clearly isnt the review site you were looking for.
Your amazing insight will be missed.
Click to expand...
So you want anyone that doesn't accept the results here without question to be kicked off the forum? This isn't [C]ommunist|OCP.
 
§kynet;1041834699 said:
So you want anyone that doesn't accept the results here without question to be kicked off the forum? This isn't [C]ommunist|OCP.
Click to expand...

the [H] Testing Methodology its probably one of (if not) the best in the industry, Brent It's probably IMO the best GPU reviewer of the industry.. if you don't agree because your shitty product isn't competitive then you don't know anything about Hardware review and clearly don't deserve to be here..
 
Araxie said:
the [H] Testing Methodology its probably one of (if not) the best in the industry, Brent It's probably IMO the best GPU reviewer of the industry.. if you don't agree because your shitty product isn't competitive then you don't know anything about Hardware review and clearly don't deserve to be here..
Click to expand...

I wouldn't say it's the best testing methodolgy, but It is one of the best. Actually playing the game and recording the frames is great.

But Techpowerup, Guru3d also have great testing practices, and they also play the games as well.

This is why everyone should not go to 1 website for hardware reviews. Look around see what everyone says before making a decision.

The conclusion is the Fury X isn't as fast as a 980ti (it's close in most benchmarks), and isn't overclocking friendly when it's suppose to be lol.
 
freeloader1969 said:
Nothing's wrong with me. Brent is going on as if the 980Ti has some overwhelming lead over the Fury X. At most it's 10% and a little higher on games that have been gimped by Nvidia with their Crapworks (Gameworks) titles. You stick two identical systems side by side, with the only difference being one has a 980Ti vs the Fury X and I'd be surprised if 10% of people could tell the difference in game play on those systems.

About the only thing I can agree on with Brent or Kyle is that the price of the Nano and Fury X are definitely too high compared to their Nvidia counterparts. I wouldn't buy either card (Fury X/Nano) at their current price.
Click to expand...

The 980ti does have an overwhelming lead.
You can either buy an overclocked card or overclock yourself and the FuryX get annihilated.
After all, it is an enthusiast card with enthusiast capabilities.
Couple that with only 4GB ram and lack of HDMI 2.0 with zero price compensation and the FuryX doesnt represent good value.

If you only want to consider basic reviews, it is still underwhelming on performance and price.
If you want to consider proper game testing evaluations and reports on the real performance difference gameworks gives, you are at the right place.
But... you... need... to... read... them.

And the the driver issue isnt fiction, it forced me to sell my 290x before I wanted to.
I was after a 980ti but was forced to buy a 980 because I had enough a bit too early.
Luckily it developed a fault and I got my 980ti and its a breath of fresh air not having problems when I install a new driver.

Go have fun with your Nano or Fury.
Its a shame to be wasting time here when you spent so much on it!
 
§kynet;1041834699 said:
So you want anyone that doesn't accept the results here without question to be kicked off the forum? This isn't [C]ommunist|OCP.
Click to expand...

I can see how you would come up with that, it sort of sums you up.
I was informing you that what you want wont be found here because this site tells the truth.
 
DASHlT said:
I wouldn't say it's the best testing methodolgy, but It is one of the best. Actually playing the game and recording the frames is great.

But Techpowerup, Guru3d also have great testing practices, and they also play the games as well.

This is why everyone should not go to 1 website for hardware reviews. Look around see what everyone says before making a decision.

The conclusion is the Fury X isn't as fast as a 980ti (it's close in most benchmarks), and isn't overclocking friendly when it's suppose to be lol.
Click to expand...

Techpowerup is good for the number of games it tests, but the actual testing practices are among the most flawed in the industry. They typically use the in game canned benchmark to do testing. It's how they test so many games and so many cards.

In addition, because of the number of games they test, they also don't use the same drivers with all cards and often recycle old results.
 
tajoh111 said:
Techpowerup is good for the number of games it tests, but the actual testing practices are among the most flawed in the industry. They typically use the in game canned benchmark to do testing. It's how they test so many games and so many cards.

In addition, because of the number of games they test, they also don't use the same drivers with all cards and often recycle old results.
Click to expand...

Not sure how that is even true since a lot of the games they review don't have an in-game benchmark.
 
§kynet;1041834723 said:
Ad hominem and pointless to this discussion.
Click to expand...

You said it :p
You brought the topic up and attributed misdemeanour where there was none.
This told us more about you than anything else.
 
I guess the testing methodology at Hardware Canucks is no good either.

OoWMEc0.png

In many ways the Fury X and its associated Fiji architecture are well ahead of their time. They point towards what the graphics market will look like in the future rather than what we’re used to right now. Hopefully the newness of the technology behind the R9 Fury X doesn’t hinder its availability because this card has every right to sell like wildfire from day one.
Click to expand...
 
DASHlT said:
Now if Kyle did hangup on a Conference call because he was unhappy with the price of the Nano (which hell i think 99% of the people were), Then in a small/little sense yea I wouldn't want to send his ass a review sample as well. 1 of my biggest pet peeves is people hanging up on you. SPECIALLY in a business workplace that is a BIG HUGE NO NO. Now do we know for sure Kyle hung up on them? No one knows other then Kyle, but if he really did, then IMO I wouldn't of sent him a sample either. But I still think that doesn't look good in AMD's book.
Click to expand...

I hung on a 10 editor conference call after the presentation was over and they told us the price. I had other stuff to do and had heard enough. Brent was still in the call.
 
§kynet;1041834610 said:
Absolute rubbish. If you go by [H] using cherry picked GW titles then maybe, but in the real world using the average of 20+ games.
Click to expand...

You seriously believe [H] "cherry picked" Gameworks titles for their latest AMD reviews? Or is it just sarcasm masking deep hurt? :D
 
I understand the frustration. The whole fury line should either be cheaper or perform better to fetch that price tag. Anyone building on a tight budget will look elsewhere entirely.

All questions of AMD's sanity aside, its no secret they are scraping the barrel these days. I heard it mentioned somewhere that they have maybe 4 years of cash reserves to stay afloat and if they don't get things turned around soon then a buyout or bankruptcy looks all but inevitable. Frankly I agree with that assessment, but time will tell. AMD's pricing on these doesn't make much sense if they're able to flood the market with them, and clearly that is not the case.

As for AMD cutting off review samples, I think its a sleazy move but its their decision to make. It won't stop the "bad" reviews anyways - just delay them, and if that is the intent then they succeeded. Apparently they think the backlash from that wont stop them from selling the few batches they have ready.

The [H] guys being included in all the briefings but getting denied a sample is kinda screwed up - stupid to waste their time like that. But in a "business decision" sense it probably wasn't a good idea for [H] to post about one of their guys hanging up on the conference call - context or not stuff like that gets around quick in these circles. They know damn well these forums are as bad as Grandma's knitting circle.
 
DASHlT said:
I have no comment. I like being able to post.
Click to expand...

I was simply confirming some questions you stated and giving some context. You can say whatever you wish...as you already did. I heard you the first time. I am pretty sure you did not get banned. ;)
 
AMD knows the reviews aren't going to be favorable, so what incentive do they have to provide cards? Sample sites that are more likely to not throw the cards under the bus and benefit from the lost page views for the sites that have already proffered negative opinions of the Fury architecture.
 
Mugato said:
You mentioned other GPU's you had to purchase when not provided one, this was due to? Was it at product launch, or an AIB launch of a "new" cooler etc. Just curious. I don't remember that kind of thing if they are more than eh 6-12 months back.

Thanks for the reviews! I wonder how many I've read on here...hundreds probably over the past decade+
Click to expand...

I've seen some responses to others and am still curious, if you are researching (thinking really hard and squinting your eyes) I'll wait a few days and check back.

I watched the AMD live stream today of the Nano, I do appreciate the engineering that went into it -we build PCBA's/boxbuild/cable assembly- where I work, I seriously do NOT believe this is worth the price. Beyond that, they blatantly ignored multiple chat questions regarding 4k 60hz TV's and how much throttling would happen under certain loads. Mostly focusing on the design creds and use case for an ITX mod build...I take that lightly, the guy that "mods" on the team hasn't done it since the 2000's. I for one, am waiting for a LOT more benchmarks, and from someone like [H]. You see a gamut of bias out there, most of it has to do with a headline. "Small and Powerful, the Nano!" "What were you thinking AMD! Nano". Being here for a while, I have learned to trust in and highly regard, the benchmarks. It's not; QUICK! RUN EVERY RES WITH EVERYTHING WE HAVE ASAP AND POST! Those can be worthwhile sometimes too, but when they do not include settings etc, it's tough to read into. I've owned everything from a S3 Virge/3dfx voodoo/9600gt -EQ Beta and Action HL- to a 980 custom, AMD and Nvidia both. So don't think I'm leaning one way or the other, I'm not. I look at price/performance/OC/NOISE, which is in direct relation to heat generation and power consumption at a desired band.
 
DASHlT said:
I know....I just.....I dunno I have been in numerous Conference Calls at work, And if the BIG DOG of lets say a hardware website that does reviews hangs up, that just seems like (to me) they have no interest.

Thats all. I think it's a bad PR move on AMD's part no doubt, but yea I don't know. I guess im getting to old anymore to care as much as I use too.

I mean hell....We ain't 25 anymore lol
Click to expand...


AMD had taken enough of my time. It was Brent's show from that point. He would be doing the review....if they sent a sample.
 
DASHlT said:
I mean....You are 110% right. Its a Fury X, downclocked, without the water cooling, slower and the same price. I honestly think it's a slap in the face to customers.
Click to expand...
If Nano is a slap in the face then Titan (all of them) is a punch to the balls.
 
§kynet;1041834782 said:
If Nano is a slap in the face then Titan (all of them) is a punch to the balls.
Click to expand...

Well it is a punch in the balls. And our Wallet.
 
§kynet;1041834782 said:
If Nano is a slap in the face then Titan (all of them) is a punch to the balls.
Click to expand...

Think how much more awesome TITAN would be though if they put it on a smaller PCB, downclocked it a bunch and made it fit a tiny ITX case for $1000. Now that would be a deal.
 
People comparing the nano to a Fury X/980Ti on price alone, make no sense. It's like comparing a Titan to a Quadro. There is no comparison for the actual niche end user - tiny SFF builds.
The price is what it is, because of what it is! You can fit it where you can't fit a Fury/980Ti etcetc
For builds where this is a requirement, the price is probably worth it, it's a unique capability + combination of features. It's irrelevant what the other cards cost or can do - they don't fit. Closest actual competition is the 970 SFF, which costs $340 less, I'd expect the Nano will be faster than it, in a majority of scenarios. Is it worth the difference? To some, likely yes, but reviews will tell. I'll happily concede I'm wrong if test results show otherwise. If this is the case, you always pay a premium for top performance. Take Titans for example.. are they worth the huge price delta at this point in time for a gaming build? Not to most, but for some they are.
And if you can afford a $650 GPU, a new 40-50" 4k Dp screen isn't a problem.

This is mostly a marketing card.

Really, I don't get all the hate, it's as if AMD raped your mother and gave them HIV. I'm looking forward to seeing the neat, tiny builds with this card.


Not to mention, hanging up on a call due to this pricing, for a niche card, seems a little unprofessional and disrespectful (edit:I now see the circumstances above, not as bad as it originally appeared to be). This has blown up bigger than it should have, now it seems to be that you started off on the wrong foot, I can understand why AMD would be a bit shitty about this.


And the Fury hate is crazy. Sure, it's hot, not as efficient, relatively pricey, neither not as fast as the 980Ti in most single slot situations, add two, the gap gets much closer if not a lead in some games - this is a testament to the CFX scaling. Add three and it becomes very interesting indeed. But let's dismiss that, because most of the sour detractors can't afford that. And throw the age old 'AMD drivers suck' in there for good measure, while ignoring any shortfalls Nvidia has.

Is this now [N]vidOCP? Jieysushs.

IMO all the current gen cards suck for 4k. None of them can do 4K properly in most situations (around 60fps+ at max settings) without multi cards. No full DX12 support from both camps, with special mention to Nvidia for really dropping the asynch ball big time.
It's making my choices for a full size 4k build over this month, rather frustrating. Choices are crappy, crap or crap, short of a baller multi card setup, with all soon to be outdated regardless. Great.. >_>
 
§kynet;1041834810 said:
Did you happen to notice the price difference between Titan X and the 980Ti? Plus if Nvidia was able to cram the X into a Nano sized card it would be an incredible feat of engineering especially if it offered up 90% of the performance for 100 watts less.
Click to expand...


You are the one that brings up Titan cost every chance you get so I thought you would identify with my post better if it said Titan.
 
§kynet;1041834825 said:
Every chance I get? Really? I'm sure you can prove that. I personally think it is a complete rip-off but if you go back you'll see I said I have no issues with Nvidia being able to charge $1000 for it, it is a niche card. You are picking and choosing what is important, you think a 1K card with 10% more performance than $650 GPU is well worth it, but don't think a small form factor high performance card is worth any premium at all.

...then your sarcastic post about a Nano sized Titan X with 100 watt power drop, yea that would not be worth anything to anyone.
Click to expand...

Just curious if you saw your title now.....LOL It is the best value ever!
 
DASHlT said:
Just curious if you saw your title now.....LOL It is the best value ever!
Click to expand...
Nice. Better than "Editor-in-Chief" who wants to be called that? No one calls you chief in a nice way unless you are actually a chief. :p


...oh and don't change the title I like it.
 
The conference call is not the reason for not getting a sample. TR also did not get a sample, and there are probably other sites. There is and was no way for AMD to know who had hung up. I took the mantle and asked pointed technical questions after the presentation, of which no one else (might I remind you) did in the call. I seemed to be the only one interested in the hardware aspects and how the clock speed and power management system worked. In fact, most of the comments made in the conference call were quite shall I say, brown nosing in regards to this card.

You want my personal opinion, and that is, my personal opinion, it is the culmination of our real-world testing result findings and conclusions in the Fury X, and Fury reviews plus conclusions in Nano Paper Launch article which have been off putting to AMD. They want to show the merits of the Nano, and downplay the negatives. That said, we were fully prepared to show those merits by testing in an SFF system testing the Nano in its intended environment with proper comparisons. Their loss.
 
§kynet;1041834834 said:
Nice. Better than "Editor-in-Chief" who wants to be called that? No one calls you chief in a nice way unless you are actually a chief. :p


...oh and don't change the title I like it.
Click to expand...

Maybe I can convince Kyle to change mine to Old Timer. "Hint Hint"
 
You guys still going to post a review further down the road? I'd still like to see an official Nano review using the [H] review standards.
 
haz_mat said:
Hanging up on someone is generally perceived as disrespectful - why post about it unless that was your intention?
Click to expand...

The presentation was over at that point. Most editors drop out at that point of the conference call, if you have questions you can stay on and ask them, if not you can leave. It isn't the kind of thing you need permission to leave and no announcement is required. Every editor's time on the call is at their discretion.
 
Brent_Justice said:
The presentation was over at that point. Most editors drop out at that point of the conference call, if you have questions you can stay on and ask them, if not you can leave. It isn't the kind of thing you need permission to leave and no announcement is required. Every editor's time on the call is at their discretion.
Click to expand...

Right, it sounds like its not even worth mentioning. Oh wait.

I'm done with this issue here as were getting off-track in this thread, just my last two cents on all this:

In the spirit of good competition and a healthy market, its lame for me to see editors potentially taking part in the cage-rattling. Leave that crap to the community, there is plenty to go around already.
 
Lately some people just seem to want to argue for the sake of argument, even with site staff!

First the 80+ PSU thread, and now here... Shit is getting out of hand!
 
I was seriously interested in the Nano when I heard about it until I saw the price. I guess I'll keep rocking the 7870 XT for a while longer. The Nano was in the right TDP range, approaching enough % increase in performance and being smaller would help a bit in my current build. The 7870 XT gets in the way of some cable routing I want to do, but I've been living with non-ideal cable routing around it for years now, so whatever I guess.
 
haz_mat said:
Right, it sounds like its not even worth mentioning. Oh wait.

I'm done with this issue here as were getting off-track in this thread, just my last two cents on all this:

In the spirit of good competition and a healthy market, its lame for me to see editors potentially taking part in the cage-rattling. Leave that crap to the community, there is plenty to go around already.
Click to expand...

If you don't want "cage-rattling" then don't do PAPER launches and not sample hardware sites that you have for every single launch over the last 1.5 decades.

Who is breaking with protocol here? It is NOT HardOCP.
 
YAY IM AN OLD TIMER!!!

Back on Topic. Kyle that Titan X as a SFF Video will come. It's called Pascal with HBM2!!

Back on topic now!
 
Couldn't help myself...

Have you seen my question about procurement of GPU's?

I don't know if my last post went through; no, it is not "on topic" but related to the topic as you have discussed in detail the conference call. What are they using? What have you used in the past? We are currently using GTM and it's shmeh. I was looking at iMeet, pretty good but lacks concurrent meetings, which we need.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top