Should we expect a review today? In the first slide at eteknix it says July 10.

The only way i see this card a success is if it has better performance compared to GTX 980 across the all resolution and the pricing is near $500

Do you have any idea if ASUS's Auto-Extreme is only used on current gen of cards (Fury/980Ti) or do they also use it on older generations like GTX 970/980. Are those cards still being manufactured or it's only what they made back then on release and they are now just selling the stock? I wonder if mine is also manufactured using this process. It would be cool.

"Triple Wing-Blade 0db Fans" - ahhh.... a PR crap at its finnest. and I hardly doubt that even in idile this card woud/could turn any fans off... but yea - if the PC is off then threre will be 0db from this card

I'm interested in what this could be. Dual UEFI Bios Switch standard/unlock mode

XzibitI'm interested in what this could be. Dual UEFI Bios Switch standard/unlock mode

Unless they want to kill Fury X sales, probably not what you hope for. Given that's two official PR slides now with specs stating "up to" 1000mhz there's a distinct possibility it has two core speeds? Perhaps the unlock switch moves it up to 1000?

Also, unlike the slightly dubious (just wrong) pre release slides touting Fury X trouncing 980ti, it does look entirely likely Fury will hands down beat the 980.

If it doesn't smack it down, this would be a big nail in a long coffin. But just to clarify, I genuinely think the Fury will beat the 980 in pretty much every game by a decent amount.
Then again, at 275watt board power it bloody ought too.

the54thvoidUnless they want to kill Fury X sales, probably not what you hope for. Given that's two official PR slides now with specs stating "up to" 1000mhz there's a distinct possibility it has two core speeds? Perhaps the unlock switch moves it up to 1000?

Doubtful. They have always worded it "Up to" since they added Power Tune.

Remember these...

• Dual Firmware: Dual UEFI BIOS with two different power settings

XzibitDoubtful. They have always worded it "Up to" since they added Power Tune.

Remember these...

• Dual Firmware: Dual UEFI BIOS with two different power settings

Doesn't counter my point. Both Asus and Sapphire cards say 'up to' so it is entirely feasible the two settings are for sub 1000 and 1000. If it ran faster than that it would use it in PR.
The other option is its a power unlimiter but even then, I'd suggest logically that it means its clocked below 1000 on stock.

We'll see very soon I'm sure.

techy1"Triple Wing-Blade 0db Fans" - ahhh.... a PR crap at its finnest. and I hardly doubt that even in idile this card woud/could turn any fans off... but yea - if the PC is off then threre will be 0db from this card

You do realize that super hot R9-390X turns of fans in idle as well on Strix models as well as MSI Gaming models? Why would R9 Fury be any different? I have a Strix GTX 980 that does that as well. I think you don't realize how absolutely gigantic these coolers are. They CAN and they DO operate in 100% passive mode in idle.

I have this card incoming, but review won't be up in time for NDA today ... several delays due to DHL strike and ASUS working slower than expected.

im looking for a cheap card able to drive 3840x1440p over 60fps. i have a feeling that this furious technoowl will be neither my first nor last choice. thanks asus, but no thanks. get to work and overclock the furyx!

W1zzardI have this card incoming, but review won't be up in time for NDA today ... several delays due to DHL strike and ASUS working slower than expected.

Will you rebench the Fury X scores due the recent driver release?

the54thvoidWill you rebench the Fury X scores due the recent driver release?

already done

The cooling seems to be quite average (based on the 980Ti version as per Guru3D). I wonder how it will be with the Fury

W1zzardalready done

Is it updated on the available Fury X review article or are you gonna make another "updated review article" for that?

Shamonto Hasan EashaIs it updated on the available Fury X review article or are you gonna make another "updated review article" for that?

Give the guy a break. You can't rewrite every old review when a new driver comes out. The new Fury X scores will be on the Fury review, I'd imagine.

Why the hell dont they make a FuryX version of this card.?? It makes no sense to just have a loop cooled option. Its going to hurt sales. In fact, I would buy the FuryX today if they had a StriX version. Not interested in the closed loop cooler.,

Wizzard you said they wont, but surely they will release an air cooled version of FuryX at some stage?? Any information?

buggalugsWhy the hell dont they make a FuryX version of this card.??

Because of AMD's embargo on AIB partners to come up with any modification :)

buggalugsWhy the hell dont they make a FuryX version of this card.?? It makes no sense to just have a loop cooled option. Its going to hurt sales. In fact, I would buy the FuryX today if they had a StriX version. Not interested in the closed loop cooler.,

Wizzard you said they wont, but surely they will release an air cooled version of FuryX at some stage?? Any information?

Clock for clock this and the Fury X will be maybe 1% apart.

buildzoidClock for clock this and the Fury X will be maybe 1% apart.

That's most probably true, and that's another example of how stupid people at AMD are.
In fact there will apparently be two overlaps in performance: Fury X/Fury and Fury Nano/390X.

This product line makes no sense but that's probably to match their strategy.

I wonder why only ASUS and Sapphire are going to release R9 Fury cards. Have MSI, XFX, etc. got fed up with AMD or does AMD not have enough faulty Fiji GPUs to supply to other manufacturers?

JossThat's most probably true, and that's another example of how stupid people at AMD are.
In fact there will apparently be two overlaps in performance: Fury X/Fury and Fury Nano/390X.

This product line makes no sense but that's probably to match their strategy.

Actually it does, IF Fury is only 1% under Fury X in preformance, then you have a choice, air or water.

While Nano is made for small formfactor pc's, try and squezze a R9 390X into a ITX cabinet without it taking up all room for airflow.
Nano is only interesting for small formfactors, since preformance will be just arround 290X, as AMD have already stated.

EboActually it does, IF Fury is only 1% under Fury X in preformance, then you have a choice, air or water.

Sir, that is stupid... and I'm being polite.

jigar2speedThe only way i see this card a success is if it has better performance compared to GTX 980 across the all resolution and the pricing is near $500

Well, in all seriousness I would only care about 1080p or higher on a GPU like this. I'm very interested to see how Fury scales up against Fury X. I would love to find out for sure if the ROP "problem" is actually a problem. Right now, it's all speculation but, Fury could put that debate to rest. Also, driver improvements are bound to change things as well.

If Fury is like Fury X, I will be intrigued because I don't game all the time but, when I do, I like good performance. So in all seriousness, something like a R9 390 would do me fine, however 80-watt multi-monitor idle is absurd. However, if this GPU is closer to the 20-watt mark (like Fury X,) on multi-monitor idle, I would be more apt to consider AMD. I don't care if the GPU sucks power down when I'm gaming, that's to be expected. I just don't want to throw power away when it's doing nothing.

All in all, this only makes me more impatient for the NDA to lift on Fury. I have a feeling that it's bound to make a different impression than Fury X did.