Fury X voltage control coming soon

DracoNB said:
I remember the top end cpus only being a few hundred, not $500+ (except the "Extreme" rip off ones)

Look at the performance "gain" from the last few years of intel cpus. its been tiny gains every year even with massive chip size reduction. Hell [H] uses a 3770k for all its testing.
Click to expand...

Thats not true at all. There has been 500+ CPU since for a while now. Looking at the original price of the pentium lineup and it was around 700 dollars and this was in 1993. This is way more money considering inflation. Pentium 2 and pentium 3 had similar pricing as well.

AMD hasn't been exerting market pressure on intel at all. More pressure is felt from ARM as things like ipads have been eating into intels low end market.
 
Is there a chance something else is going on?

I just started ocing my 7950 and I learned unless you get over the power throttling you're over clock isn't worth very much

Makes you wonder if there's another sort of power throttling going on here with the fury x that the power slider isn't taking care of
 
DracoNB said:
I remember the top end cpus only being a few hundred, not $500+ (except the "Extreme" rip off ones)

Look at the performance "gain" from the last few years of intel cpus. its been tiny gains every year even with massive chip size reduction. Hell [H] uses a 3770k for all its testing.
Click to expand...

so are you saying that the rip off FX9590 at 900$ never existed?. ;) that price was so fucking wrong that couple of weeks later it dropped to 300$ to be competitive with intel..
 
H-street said:
Is there a chance something else is going on?

I just started ocing my 7950 and I learned unless you get over the power throttling you're over clock isn't worth very much

Makes you wonder if there's another sort of power throttling going on here with the fury x that the power slider isn't taking care of
Click to expand...

It's possible, and currently is my guess. Having Unwinder confirm our correct this would help a lot to confirm what is going on.
 
There's not enough coil whine! Coil whine is obviously what makes the Maxwell cards so fast. AMD tried to hack their own whine onto the card with the pump noise, but it was just not genuine enough.

Also needs more flame graphics...and a skull. Because marketing!
 
Problem is, even when AMD is on to a winner (clawhammer/9500/5870/7970 etc) and kicking ass, they have not enough marketing $ to beat the FUD from the opposing fanboys.
Even when AMD was nearly twice as fast as the pentium 4 presshots, people still bought them in droves because 'prentium ghz marketing' won.

Same stuff this time around. Fury X is the best solution for multi card configurations at 4k, titan x and 980ti owners (with both setups) have stated this a few times now. But the negative FUD surrounding them is turning off potential buyers. Because single card 4k sucks if you want it maxed and over 60fps.. on all cards. But no, just the fury x sucks.

Sad time and I hope this not the end for AMD, or it'll be a boring, stale market like the CPU scene.

Also another reason for less advancements in CPUs is targeting the explod(ed/ing) laptop/portable market... power efficiency over raw speed increases at the cutting edge (with the heat that comes with..).

It's a great time to have a desktop but also not in some ways..
 
The double GPU FuryX might shine some scratch for AMD. Not buying anything myself til next year.
 
griff30 said:
The double GPU FuryX might shine some scratch for AMD. Not buying anything myself til next year.
Click to expand...
We will have 6 months of bad press for Fury X, then they launch the dual Fury and nobody wants it anymore. :p
Pump whine, overheating VRMs, low performance, stuttering issues, no OC headroom... It just keeps piling up.

By the end of 2015 the 980 Ti's price will be even lower, and HBM1 production reduced (moving into HBM2), Fury X supply is going to dry up even more. You will be able to buy 3 980 Tis for the price of one Fury X2.
 
Ok thats just fud, it does not have overheating VRMs, Fury X is within about 10% of a 980ti and quite a few review sites are positive on it, just not here. I have yet to see someone prove stuttering issues, the frame times I have seen all look reasonable, but granted I did not look through the entire internet. For sure Fury X did not knock it out of the park but it's within spitting distance of Nvidia. Just seems more people are upset it didn't cause a price reduction on Nvidia cards. These Monolithic gpu cores were just never going to be cheap, I am sure yields are not the best on them due to their sheer size even tho it's being done on a mature platform. To be honest I wont care too much about the market until a single card can do 4k with the eye candy turned on.
 
Gideon said:
Ok thats just fud, it does not have overheating VRMs, Fury X is within about 10% of a 980ti and quite a few review sites are positive on it, just not here. I have yet to see someone prove stuttering issues, the frame times I have seen all look reasonable, but granted I did not look through the entire internet. For sure Fury X did not knock it out of the park but it's within spitting distance of Nvidia. Just seems more people are upset it didn't cause a price reduction on Nvidia cards. These Monolithic gpu cores were just never going to be cheap, I am sure yields are not the best on them due to their sheer size even tho it's being done on a mature platform. To be honest I wont care too much about the market until a single card can do 4k with the eye candy turned on.
Click to expand...

I know for one I will never buy a AMD card because of the comments saying it would be a Overclocking Beast. I bought one and returned it promptly and bought a 980ti that overclocks to 1500~ and literally destroys a Fury X that is overclocked.

Overclocking like a beast to me does not mean that if you are lucky you can get 10% overclock out of it.

Pathetic and to be honest I think AMD is done.
 
supeg said:
I know for one I will never buy a AMD card because of the comments saying it would be a Overclocking Beast. I bought one and returned it promptly and bought a 980ti that overclocks to 1500~ and literally destroys a Fury X that is overclocked.

Overclocking like a beast to me does not mean that if you are lucky you can get 10% overclock out of it.

Pathetic and to be honest I think AMD is done.
Click to expand...

Really you bought one? Funny your post history has you bashing it since before release...

Wow, this card.... Such a dissapointment. Slower then a 980TI and sucks at overclocking.

Why would anyone buy this over a TI? The built in cooling?
Click to expand...

You already owned a 980 TI and posted your OC results here: http://hardforum.com/showthread.php?p=1041663597&highlight=#post1041663597
 
Oh no a troll got busted :D

Also you forgot to mention you put it under water to get that clock. Supeg if your going to lie make sure you dont leave posts laying around that show the truth.
 
Gideon said:
Oh no a troll got busted :D

Also you forgot to mention you put it under water to get that clock. Supeg if your going to lie make sure you dont leave posts laying around that show the truth.
Click to expand...

a 980TI doesn't need to go under water to reach those clocks.. even with reference cooler..
 
Araxie said:
a 980TI doesn't need to go under water to reach those clocks.. even with reference cooler..
Click to expand...

Maybe not, but its damn funny that he lied so much about it, not to mention talking about the cooler like it would be unwanted while putting a water block on his card.
 
supeg said:
I know for one I will never buy a AMD card because of the comments saying it would be a Overclocking Beast. I bought one and returned it promptly and bought a 980ti that overclocks to 1500~ and literally destroys a Fury X that is overclocked.

Overclocking like a beast to me does not mean that if you are lucky you can get 10% overclock out of it.

Pathetic and to be honest I think AMD is done.
Click to expand...

Well if you are thinking that way you shouldn't buy an nvidia card. Look at the fiasco that was the 970 and they said it was a feature.
 
Mister E said:
Doesn't seem worth it at all. If these things get pushed like that just to gain a couple frames, I see a shit ton of RMA's in the near future.
Click to expand...

I'd be curious to know the % of people buying cards that intend to overclock. AMD seems like they are basically sending out maxed out cards for what they have in a given generation, while nvidia is sending out cards that are lower than a great majority of their potential. It can be reached by either having the user do extra work or having the user pay more money for a factory overclocked card.


My guess is most people buy cards and use them at base speeds. That's essentially what I do. When I need more performance I buy a new gpu entirely instead of trying to ductape the performance of the current card while asking it to push harder.
 
tybert7 said:
I'd be curious to know the % of people buying cards that intend to overclock. AMD seems like they are basically sending out maxed out cards for what they have in a given generation, while nvidia is sending out cards that are lower than a great majority of their potential. It can be reached by either having the user do extra work or having the user pay more money for a factory overclocked card.


My guess is most people buy cards and use them at base speeds. That's essentially what I do. When I need more performance I buy a new gpu entirely instead of trying to ductape the performance of the current card while asking it to push harder.
Click to expand...

The problem is that there are no new gpus to buy right now...so if you wanted more performance right here and now then really your only choice to shell out a ton of money to get more cards for sli/xfire, or overclock.
 
DPI said:
So much incorrect and outdated here. The highly customized version of "DX12" on Xbone will have no parallel to the Windows version except marketingspeak.

As long as there is still a sizeable pool of Windows 7 machines, development target will remain DX11. "But free Windows 10 upgrade" doesn't change that. Many people won't install a new version of Windows for many different reasons.

once again, it will be years before there's a critical mass of developers targeting DX12. the guy that's the eye of the storm of DX12/Vulkan - Johan Anderson at DICE, who helped create Mantle with AMD and is at the leading edge of infusing Frostbite with DX12/Vulkan - is saying Holiday 2016 at the earliest for any EA titles with it. More conservative developers seeking maximum ROI to hit the widest number of PCs will drag even more on DX12.
Click to expand...


I am not attacking you, this is just a general statement directed at people who behave a certain way. Anyone who wants to play pc games and refuses to upgrade to windows 10 to get access to dx12 is a f*cking moron, and not worthy of consideration. If people have issues with the new OS for specific hardware, that's fine. They can dual boot, they can use multiple machines (how many people have JUST a desktop here vs that plus a notebook or more?).

This is a complaint with no water. Just a sort of decoy argument thrown out there to make a debaters point rather than get at the truth.


There WILL be dx12 games before 2015 ends, unless multiple game makers lied. That is a lot of lies to account for. And the head of EA games engines basically said he wants 2016 to be a hard target to require dx12 for their latest titles on the pc. Now I don't think it will be a requirement for business reasons, but I am virtually CERTAIN Johann does not want to leave out dx12 in future titles, and that involves a lot of EA properties. This presumption that dx12 titles are some fairy tail until YEARS later is complete bs.


addendum:

another reason your YEARS later presumption is willful ignorance is that the previous jumps in dx usually required COMPLETELY new hardware that people had to spend hundreds of dollars on. We have GENERATIONS of gpus going back YEARS already that capable of at least some of the enhancements of dx12. This is not the same scenario of years past. It's just not. This will likely be the fastest transition we've ever seen. And it's a good thing too. They release an assassins creed every year, of all the crap performing games that try to do too much with too many units, THAT type of game NEEDS more performance with draw calls that dx12 could provide. What fool developer would just say f*ck off to that performance improvement avenue? Ok, maybe ubisoft, but I'd have to see it first.
 
a developer that cant afford the extra resources required to target the DX12 code path will not be using it.

IE any non-AAA title.

It makes no difference if there is performance left on the table, only the big houses can afford it.

A vast majority of upcoming games WILL NOT be using dx12.
 
Pretty much like Mantle, DX12 will further distinguish AAA games from the rest. The difference, so far, will be quite remarkable. FPS & RTS games will especially benefit right now.

I'm eager to see the responsiveness in games like Devil May Cry and Mortal Kombat DX12 will bring.
 
The Mac said:
a developer that cant afford the extra resources required to target the DX12 code path will not be using it.

IE any non-AAA title.

It makes no difference if there is performance left on the table, only the big houses can afford it.

A vast majority of upcoming games WILL NOT be using dx12.
Click to expand...
Once DX12 is added to Unity, Crytek, UE4, etc there will likely be a lot more indie games that support it. It will really only be problematic for small studios that are building their own engines.
 
Rizen said:
Once DX12 is added to Unity, Crytek, UE4, etc there will likely be a lot more indie games that support it. It will really only be problematic for small studios that are building their own engines.
Click to expand...

I believe all of those engines already have DX12 built into them. So it's up to the developer to use DX12 or not.
 
cageymaru said:
I believe all of those engines already have DX12 built into them. So it's up to the developer to use DX12 or not.
Click to expand...
Ah, I wasn't aware if they had released DX12 renderers for those engines yet or not.
 
yes because all those engines (or their predecessor) having dx10/dx11 stopped everyone from continuing to use DX9 only.

:rolleyes:
 
The Mac said:
yes because all those engines (or their predecessor) having dx10/dx11 stopped everyone from continuing to use DX9 only.

:rolleyes:
Click to expand...

No shit, I think everyone forgets how slow the adoption of a new version of Direct X always is. Most companies are going to focus on making sure the game runs well on people with shitty average hardware, not trying to squeeze more FPS out of a new Direct version that ONLY people running Windows 10 have.
 
ocellaris said:
No shit, I think everyone forgets how slow the adoption of a new version of Direct X always is. Most companies are going to focus on making sure the game runs well on people with shitty average hardware, not trying to squeeze more FPS out of a new Direct version that ONLY people running Windows 10 have.
Click to expand...

Windows XP held back gaming for years.

Windows 10 is a free upgrade for everyone so no reason to not upgrade, especially as a gamer. There is 0 reason to stick with DX 11, all gpus in the last few years will support DX 12, unlike only the 8000 supporting DX 10 when released.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/9472/windows-10-launch-day-gpu-support-summary
 
The Mac said:
yes because all those engines (or their predecessor) having dx10/dx11 stopped everyone from continuing to use DX9 only.

:rolleyes:
Click to expand...
I don't think that the adoption period of DX12 is going to be as slow as it was with DX10 and DX11. For both DX10 and DX11, the GPUs had to be updated to support the new features specifically, and a lot of gamers were still on DX9-only hardware at the time. So it made sense to write games in DX9 to target the widest audience.

With DX12, since the last several generations of GPUs from NVIDIA and AMD already support the API, the adoption by users should be quicker since we don't have to rely on as many people upgrading before it's worthwhile for developers to target.
 
lots of reasons.

1. Interface hatred
2. Unsupported apps.
3. Unsupported hardware (im looking at you creative)
4, Non-compliant mobos/cpus
5. Lack of storage
6. General obstinance
7. General ignorance
 
Last edited:
DracoNB said:
Windows XP held back gaming for years.

Windows 10 is a free upgrade for everyone so no reason to not upgrade, especially as a gamer. There is 0 reason to stick with DX 11, all gpus in the last few years will support DX 12, unlike only the 8000 supporting DX 10 when released.
Click to expand...

Correction: Only people that have valid licenses for Windows 7/8.x are able to upgrade for free. I'm on the Insider program so I technically have a free copy for as long as I want to stay in that program but if I choose to exit it, I'll have to stump up the cash to pick up a retail copy.

EDIT: As to why someone would not be running 10 now is because it's still not 100% stable yet. Windows 7 at six months prior to retail sale (the Public Preview) was more stable than Windows 10 is today.
 
Last edited:
Oh sorry, I forgot all the people that can't install a new OS due to not having a valid license or don't have 10 gb free for the install files but can afford new 50 gb games every month. wait wut?
 
You postulate that DX12 uptake will be huge because it is free. It's free to a certain sub-set of people, not everyone. That sub-set may be a significant number but it's not everyone.

If you're going to falsify facts to make a point don't get offended when you're called on it.
 
dscherf said:
You postulate that DX12 uptake will be huge because it is free. It's free to a certain sub-set of people, not everyone. That sub-set may be a significant number but it's not everyone.

If you're going to falsify facts to make a point don't get offended when you're called on it.
Click to expand...

Its free to every legit owner of windows 7/8. If they pirated 7/8 I don't see why they wouldn't pirate 10 as well.
 
DracoNB said:
Its free to every legit owner of windows 7/8. If they pirated 7/8 I don't see why they wouldn't pirate 10 as well.
Click to expand...

please see my list above.

at least 3 of my gamers friends have zero interest upgrading to 10. (mostly due to #6)
 
dscherf said:
Oh, so it's free to everyone because everyone steals.

Got it. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
Way to miss the point.

What he's saying is if you own a legal copy of Windows 7/8, you get Windows 10 for free. If you don't own a legal copy of Windows 7/8 and you pirated it, you'll probably pirate 10 as well. Either way, everyone has a "free" upgrade path unless you are coming from a very old copy of Windows.
 
and what we are saying is thats irrelevent.

Free copy or not, there are MANY people who will not upgrade for various reasons.

for expample one of my machines i can, the other i CANNOT (media center)
 
Rizen said:
Way to miss the point.

What he's saying is if you own a legal copy of Windows 7/8, you get Windows 10 for free. If you don't own a legal copy of Windows 7/8 and you pirated it, you'll probably pirate 10 as well. Either way, everyone has a "free" upgrade path unless you are coming from a very old copy of Windows.
Click to expand...

I'm not missing the point at all. Windows 10 is only free to legitimate customers, not everyone. Stating that a pirate is going to pirate does not negate the fact that Windows 10 is not legally free to everyone. If you're going to go down the path of saying, 'well, it's free to non-legitimate users of Windows because, piracy' then it's you who is really missing the point.

I could get all my hardware for free if only I were a thief. :confused:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top