# AMD ends driver support for R9 Fury and Radeon 200, 300 series???



## Zyll Goliat (Jun 22, 2021)

"AMD confirmed it is retiring a large number of its graphics card today. Starting with Adrenalin 21.6.1 driver graphics card from Radeon Fury, Radeon 300, as well as Radeon 200 series, will no longer be supported, as all these cards have been moved to the legacy section"






Wow!!!In my opinion this is just really BAD move from AMD as R9 Fury and even R9 390 & 290 Series of cards are still very capable especially when we know that during this Mining craze many Gamers simply do not have a choice and need to use some of the older cards but seems like AMD possibly believe that FSR could boost r9 Fury/290/390 series of cards a bit to much for their taste and seems like that AMD do not want's to give you always free performance.....

What is your opinion about this?

P.S.What happened with Fine Wine AMD?


----------



## Guwapo77 (Jun 22, 2021)

I'll be damned.  I just built my son's and wife's computers with two of my old Fury X's out of my old gaming system.  Those cards are still very good and my son games at 1080p and there is nothing holds that card back...except the drivers now.  I must say, this is one of those rare occasions where AMD completely fails the consumer.


----------



## birdie (Jun 22, 2021)

Zyll Goliath said:


> "AMD confirmed it is retiring a large number of its graphics card today. Starting with Adrenalin 21.6.1 driver graphics card from Radeon Fury, Radeon 300, as well as Radeon 200 series, will no longer be supported, as all these cards have been moved to the legacy section"
> 
> Wow!!!In my opinion this is just really BAD move from AMD as R9 Fury and even R9 390 & 290 Series of cards are still very capable especially when we know that during this Mining craze many Gamers simply do not have a choice and need to use some of the older cards but seems like AMD possibly believe that FSR could boost r9 Fury/290/390 series of cards a bit to much for their taste and seems like that AMD do not want's to give you always free performance.....
> 
> ...



Nothing, AMD fans have always eaten too much of hallucinogenic mushrooms and believed AMD somehow treated them differently than unnamed customers and AMD wasn't interested in improving their margins and lowering expenses as much as possible.

AMD has also dropped support for Windows 7/8.1.

Since the release of the Ryzen 5000 series it's all been crystal clear. I wonder why you're still surprised.


----------



## akzhangweiyi (Jun 22, 2021)

These cards can't support FidelityFX Super Resolution, that's it.


----------



## Zyll Goliat (Jun 22, 2021)

Guwapo77 said:


> I'll be damned.  I just built my son's and wife's computers with two of my old Fury X's out of my old gaming system.  Those cards are still very good and my son games at 1080p and there is nothing holds that card back...except the drivers now.  I must say, this is one of those rare occasions where AMD completely fails the consumer.


Yep...I totally agree with you I have R9 Fury and that card is still very capable and even on higher resolution 1440p/4K(lower details)can still performs really good in some games....+ I can just imagine that with FSR they could work much much better and maybe that's the real reason why AMD do not want to support those cards anymore......


----------



## Dr. Dro (Jun 22, 2021)

It's a shame, I knew this was coming, but nobody was forewarned of it. NVIDIA gave the public at large three months advance notice for Kepler's discontinuance, and this came out of the blue. It's bad timing, too. I sincerely think the R9 Fury series (and Tonga) should still be supported, though. They're barely 5 years old, share a common base architecture with Polaris - and that's gotta be a kick in the teeth - Maxwell has at least 3 years left for the official 8-year policy to lapse, and it's likely they'll support it closer to 9 as they've done with Kepler.


----------



## Guwapo77 (Jun 22, 2021)

Zyll Goliath said:


> Yep...I totally agree with you I have R9 Fury and that card is still very capable and even on higher resolution 1440p/4K(lower details)can still performs really good in some games....+ I can just imagine that with FSR they could work much much better and maybe that's the real reason why AMD do not want to support those cards anymore......


That is very plausible.  I had my Fury X's running 3 x 1440p 60hz monitors.  The only reason why I upgraded to the 6900XT was because I upgraded to 3 x 1440p 144/170hz monitors.


----------



## xtreemchaos (Jun 22, 2021)

im sorry to say but us "gpu owners" are just a cash cow and alas when the makers move on some of us gets left behind "i own 2 r9 Fs". its a dog eat dog world.


----------



## Dr. Dro (Jun 22, 2021)

Folks freaking out over "official" FSR support can probably rest easy. It's middleware and requires developer implementation, and 21.5.2 has more in common with future AMD drivers than any NVIDIA driver will ever hope to, yet the tech works on GeForce. It's probably not going to receive driver-side performance optimizations, so maybe in a longer-term future as 21.5.2 ages and becomes obsolete, games begin to refuse to run or disable specific features on this hardware.

That's how Fermi and its 391.35 driver has been on its undead state of late, and how the 342.01 drivers for the Tesla generation have worked for the past few years now, in the games that still support DX10 codepaths and/or GL 3.3. It's a bit more uncommon to AMD folks because the last GPU that had been discontinued was the HD 6970 and that goes many years back by now. Either way, a toast to the R9 Fury X, it was definitely one of the most exquisite and interesting GPUs I have ever owned.


----------



## Gmr_Chick (Jun 22, 2021)

I own an R9 280X. It was supposed to be a backup. Not anymore, I guess.


----------



## Valantar (Jun 22, 2021)

I guess my pending upgrade from my Fury X to a 6800 XT or 6900 XT is indeed timely. I guess I could say I'm a bit disappointed, but ... meh. I've stuck with 21.2.3 for a while anyhow, as the more recent releases had some significant bugs for me (non-working framerate limiters, non-working overlays, etc.).

IMO, they should have kept including game optimizations for these cards for a few years more, but it's entirely reasonable that they are excluded from releases pushing features that the GPUs don't support at all. Then again, is their driver delivery system so non-modular that they couldn't just flag these features for exclusion on non-compatible cards and still install the update? This of course has its own set of issues (what's the point of an update if it doesn't really contain anything?), but it would keep the door open for game optimizations. I mean, Polaris and Vega are still GCN, so most optimizations should carry backwards to previous GCN GPUs with minor tweaks, right?


----------



## windwhirl (Jun 22, 2021)

I think it makes sense, five years is long time in tech, never mind seven or ten years. 

Sure, you're not getting any more updates, but it's not like the cards are suddenly going to stop working.


----------



## Zyll Goliat (Jun 22, 2021)

windwhirl said:


> I think it makes sense, five years is long time in tech, never mind seven or ten years.
> 
> Sure, you're not getting any more updates, but it's not like the cards are suddenly going to stop working.


Sure they are not going to STOP working BUT some of those cards like R9 Fury series and even R9 390/290 aren't that old(5-6 years)and those cards are still very capable + they could REALLY benefit from new FSR tech especially in these time when Gamers struggling to get anything decent AMD deciding to drop support like that.....and yeah not even to mention that some of those cards was been payed premium price back then....to getting driver support for "just"5 years???Now the more I am thinking about this I believe that am actually really disgusted by this move and after this I am going to think twice if I am going to buy anything anymore from AMD.....


----------



## windwhirl (Jun 22, 2021)

Zyll Goliath said:


> Sure they are not going to STOP working BUT some of those cards like R9 Fury series and even R9 390/290 aren't that old(5-6 years)and those cards are still very capable + they could REALLY benefit from new FSR tech especially in these time when Gamers struggling to get anything decent AMD deciding to drop support like that.....and yeah not even to mention that some of those cards was been payed premium price back then....to getting driver support for "just"5 years???I am actually really disgusted by this move from AMD.....


Can you even prove if FSR is technically feasible on GCN 1-3? And please back that up with actual documentation, not “muh, AMD doesn't want to because profits” kind of arguments. I mean, that's a valid point, but technical feasibility is more important first. 

And premium price? I'd argue that premium price target people who can upgrade far more often than the rest of the price bracket targets. 

Gamers struggling to get anything decent: these are old cards. No driver update is suddenly going to boost their performance by 50%, maybe not even 10% in select hypothetical games that would have been supported if the support for these cards were not dropped. They are old, so anyone that wants to get something decent should just save up money to buy something in the newer architectures. I'm not even saying to buy high end GPUs, just something newer than old cards.

Also, people bitch at AMD for driver issues, but then want them to support seven GPU architectures? Really?


----------



## Aquinus (Jun 22, 2021)

I used to have a 390 and while it did okay for the time, it was one of the most power hungry and unstable GPUs I've ever owned. It was incredibly finicky for the majority of the time I used it, both across Windows and Linux. When I upgraded to a Vega 64 the difference was night and day when it came to stability and performance. AMD isn't making any money off supporting the older GPUs either and acts as a barrier to making further improvements to their drivers for newer cards since a lot of code is shared. There are a lot of good reasons for AMD to do this. The oldest AMD GPU I currently use is the Vega 64. So... meh, nbd.

With that said, it's not like your GPU will suddenly stop working because AMD decided to stop supporting it. It just means that you're stuck with the last version of drivers that they release. Sooner or later, you'll need a new GPU, but that probably won't be tomorrow or even the near future.


----------



## Zyll Goliat (Jun 22, 2021)

Aquinus said:


> I used to have a 390 and while it did okay for the time, it was one of the most power hungry and unstable GPUs I've ever owned. It was incredibly finicky for the majority of the time I used it, both across Windows and Linux. When I upgraded to a Vega 64 the difference was night and day when it came to stability and performance. AMD isn't making any money off supporting the older GPUs either and acts as a barrier to making further improvements to their drivers for newer cards since a lot of code is shared. There are a lot of good reasons for AMD to do this. The oldest AMD GPU I currently use is the Vega 64. So... meh, nbd.
> 
> With that said, it's not like your GPU will suddenly stop working because AMD decided to stop supporting it. It just means that you're stuck with the last version of drivers that they release. Sooner or later, you'll need a new GPU, but that probably won't be tomorrow or even the near future.


That's perfectly clear....and I am not one of those guys that wants to pick a "Green"or"Red" team I just want  best bang for my buck....now seeing the company that drops driver support for GPU's that are 5+ years old do not looks good in my eyes...What's next move 3 years of drivers support??....maybe 2 years??.....If this pass as "OK"move from AMD do you think that Nvidia not going to do the same after a while...Who knows maybe this is going to become common practice from now on.....


----------



## Ahhzz (Jun 22, 2021)

Gmr_Chick said:


> I own an R9 280X. It was supposed to be a backup. Not anymore, I guess.


My Sapphire 290 was a sweet card until I swapped it last year, and was happy to have it for a fall back. To be fair tho, it's not like they're disabling the old cards, or the last set of drivers suddenly no longer works. It's just that there won't be any newer drivers, and I can understand a company focusing on the newer technology cards.


----------



## Aquinus (Jun 22, 2021)

Zyll Goliath said:


> That's perfectly clear....and I am not one of those guys that wants to pick a "Green"or"Red" team I just want  best bang for my buck....now seeing the company that drops driver support for GPU's that are 5+ years old do not looks good in my eyes...What's next move 3 years of drivers support??....maybe 2 years??.....If this pass as "OK"move from AMD do you think that Nvidia not going to do the same after a while...Who knows maybe this is going to become common practice from now on.....


Another thing to consider is that now AMDGPU in Linux is fairly stable for the earlier GCN chips these days and that if you find that the GPU no longer works in Windows, you might still have luck in Linux and Proton works pretty damn well these days. Either way, nothing lasts forever and this just means that at some point in the future, the last driver that was released will be insufficient, but there are still options. Might not be the best options, but there are options.

The timing just sucks because GPUs are incredibly expensive right now and I would not blame anyone for not wanting to upgrade right this second.


----------



## Valantar (Jun 22, 2021)

windwhirl said:


> Can you even prove if FSR is technically feasible on GCN 1-3? And please back that up with actual documentation, not “muh, AMD doesn't want to because profits” kind of arguments. I mean, that's a valid point, but technical feasibility is more important first.
> 
> And premium price? I'd argue that premium price target people who can upgrade far more often than the rest of the price bracket targets.
> 
> ...


I was about to say the same thing. Given that AMD claimed some significant updates across the entire GPU for Polaris and Vega, I wonder if earlier GCN can actually support FSR at all. It would definitel be nice if it could, but it's entirely feasible that it can't.


----------



## newtekie1 (Jun 22, 2021)

Remember when nVidia dropped support for cards after 12 years of support with 3 years of advanced notice and the AMD fanboys lost their minds? Well Fury owners got 6 years of support and then just dropped with no notice.



akzhangweiyi said:


> These cards can't support FidelityFX Super Resolution, that's it.


So don't allow it to be enabled on cards it isn't supported, don't just drop all support for the cards entirely.


----------



## Ahhzz (Jun 22, 2021)

newtekie1 said:


> Remember when nVidia dropped support for cards after 12 years of support with 3 years of advanced notice and the AMD fanboys lost their minds? Well Fury owners got 6 years of support and then just dropped with no notice.
> 
> 
> So don't allow it to be enabled on cards it isn't supported, don't just drop all support for the cards entirely.


Gotta agree here, even tho I understand dropping driver support for older products. The "no notice" bugs me, but then, what are people going to do, even if they did give notice? If you go out today and buy something that old, you have to know it's not supporting the newest Bell or Whistle, so that's no issue or excuse for complaint. And there's nothing I could have done last week or month, knowing that they weren't going to make new drivers for a 5-year old (or older) card. Still, kind of a d*ck move....


----------



## Frick (Jun 22, 2021)

I've never understood the uproar about these things. It's not like the cards will stop working.


----------



## puma99dk| (Jun 22, 2021)

Frick said:


> I've never understood the uproar about these things. It's not like the cards will stop working.



I am wondering if AMD and Nvidia haven't stopped driver supports would we have seen graphics drivers around 1GB already or would they have made them in to series of the graphics card to cut down the drivers so they won't be a massive to download?

we see like 400-500MB for drivers now if this does it, it's still huge in 2021 not everyone have a big connection I am just lucky to have 1Gbit up and down because it can be provided even I would have taken 500Mbit but it's more expensive because it's only the main fiber supplier that give that speed and they bundle it with anti-virus, wifi and shit that I don't need and I can not get a discount if I don't want it they don't care they want to offer wifi garantee and shitty first line support.

I am just lucky there are other companies that just focuses on raw internet nothing else.


----------



## oldwalltree (Jun 22, 2021)

Frick said:


> I've never understood the uproar about these things. It's not like the cards will stop working.


I think the frustration is that there will not be any driver fixes for new games or if a current popular title has an update. Even the 200 series is still capable of playing esports titles at a respectable FPS @ 1080p.


----------



## Vya Domus (Jun 22, 2021)

oldwalltree said:


> I think the frustration is that there will not be any driver fixes for new games or if a current popular title has an update.



This is the thing that people do not understand. Do you really think AMD was actively working on bug fixes for these cards until this day for the past 8 years ?

No way, AMD probably stopped working on these in any meaningful way years ago, this is just a formality. Think about Kepler cards, technically they are supported to this day but they've been performing horrendously bad in new titles for years now, it's pretty clear that nothing is done for those products. Just because a company claims they are supporting a product it does not mean they are actively doing so.


----------



## Zubasa (Jun 22, 2021)

Vya Domus said:


> This is the thing that people do not understand. Do you really think AMD was actively working on bug fixes for these cards until this day for the past 8 years ?
> 
> No way, AMD probably stopped working on these in any meaningful way years ago, this is just a formality. Think about Kepler cards, technically they are supported to this day but they've been performing horrendously bad in new titles for years now, it's pretty clear that nothing is done for those products. Just because a company claims they are supporting a product it does not mean they are actively doing so.


Kepler support will end in a few months anyway.


----------



## GrevenX (Jun 22, 2021)

WTF Is Intel.....err AMD Thinking....sad sad day. Of course i just purchsed an R9 290X for our Churchs computer for light graphical tasks....


----------



## Ahhzz (Jun 22, 2021)

GrevenX said:


> WTF Is Intel.....err AMD Thinking....sad sad day. Of course i just purchsed an R9 290X for our Churchs computer for light graphical tasks....


And an R9 290x will work great for "light graphical tasks" for a while to come. Nothing about that changes because they stop creating new drivers. Sure, some of the newer abilities aren't available, but most of those wouldn't be available on that card anyway, new driver or not. The only thing this really hurts is if Windows or one of the major "graphical task" companies does an update that breaks compatibility with the card, but as much noise as we in the tech world see about that, it really doesn't happen the vast majority of the time. You'll be fine.


----------



## windwhirl (Jun 22, 2021)

Vya Domus said:


> No way, AMD probably stopped working on these in any meaningful way years ago, this is just a formality.


For the record, the last reference I found for anything pre-Polaris was back in December 2019, fixing an out of video memory error on Radeon 200/300 series cards. Every other bug fix mentioned after? Who knows to which card they apply.


----------



## QuietBob (Jun 22, 2021)

_...cries in 2x HD7970..._

But then again, I don't really play new titles. So the retired driver support doesn't bother me that much


----------



## CrAsHnBuRnXp (Jun 22, 2021)

Shit is 10 years + old. I dont know why this surprises anyone. IMO, it's about time.


----------



## Zyll Goliat (Jun 22, 2021)

CrAsHnBuRnXp said:


> Shit is 10 years + old. I dont know why this surprises anyone. IMO, it's about time.


Maybe because R9 Fury&R9 290/390 Series of cards are 5+ years old.....


----------



## DeathtoGnomes (Jun 22, 2021)

There is nothing new AMD can do with those cards, to keep them "in the loop" means more work and larger  downloads.  There should be a final EOL download for these older cards.


----------



## Valantar (Jun 22, 2021)

GrevenX said:


> WTF Is Intel.....err AMD Thinking....sad sad day. Of course i just purchsed an R9 290X for our Churchs computer for light graphical tasks....


Do you think those tasks will require future driver updates? 'Cause if they work today, nothing is going to change. Unless the software vendor breaks it, in which case fixing it is their responsibility.


----------



## delshay (Jun 22, 2021)

Zubasa said:


> Kepler support will end in a few months anyway.



Yeah, but they were warned well in advance. Being a R9 Nano user's this move sucks. You don't see Microsoft doing this.. It's like they made a decision overnight & stuck it on they website the next day.

These cards will not work with upcoming windows 11 either.


----------



## Deleted member 202104 (Jun 22, 2021)

delshay said:


> Yeah, but they were warned well in advance. Being a R9 Nano user's this move sucks. You don't see Microsoft doing this.. It's like they made a decision overnight & stuck it on they website.
> 
> These cards will not work with upcoming windows 11 either.



What's wrong with using 10 until 2025?  At least you can still do that.  AMD left me high and dry with a 290x on Windows 8.1 back in 2017.

I don't see the the need to be on the bleeding edge OS version on six year old hardware.


----------



## delshay (Jun 22, 2021)

weekendgeek said:


> What's wrong with using 10 until 2025?  At least you can still do that.  AMD left me high and dry with a 290x on Windows 8.1 back in 2017.
> 
> I don't see the the need to be on the bleeding edge OS version on six year old hardware.



From my understanding, there will be no more windows 10 support either if the card has moved to legacy. From my understanding it's tied to the hardware itself.     ..Please correct me if I'm wrong.


----------



## windwhirl (Jun 22, 2021)

delshay said:


> From my understanding, there will be no more windows 10 support either if the card has moved to legacy. From my understanding it's tied to the hardware itself.     ..Please correct me if I'm wrong.


Depends on whether Microsoft introduces more changes to the Windows Display Driver Model and related APIs. 

A few months ago I had to upgrade from the November WHQL driver to a Beta one because it was throwing display driver errors a few times a day on a R7 260X. When I did some digging, it was because of a security update that touched the graphics subsystems.


----------



## Flyordie (Jun 23, 2021)

I can see dropping the 200 and 300 series as they are based on an older version of GCN. However, the Fury and Fury X cards, those should be supported until they end support for Vega 56/64 imho.


----------



## Deleted member 202104 (Jun 23, 2021)

delshay said:


> From my understanding, there will be no more windows 10 support either if the card has moved to legacy. From my understanding it's tied to the hardware itself.     ..Please correct me if I'm wrong.





windwhirl said:


> Depends on whether Microsoft introduces more changes to the Windows Display Driver Model and related APIs.
> 
> A few months ago I had to upgrade from the November WHQL driver to a Beta one because it was throwing display driver errors a few times a day on a R7 260X. When I did some digging, it was because of a security update that touched the graphics subsystems.



Well if that's the case, it truly sucks.  I would have assumed that the last valid driver should work with the hardware, but I guess it is Microsoft we're talking about.  There were 'hacks' in the past that allowed the newer drivers to be installed, but with Win10 it's probably anybody's guess at this point.


----------



## AsRock (Jun 23, 2021)

Knew some thing like this was going to happen, going on about support with FSR for the 1060, but nothing was said about the  290\390.




Ahhzz said:


> And an R9 290x will work great for "light graphical tasks" for a while to come. Nothing about that changes because they stop creating new drivers. Sure, some of the newer abilities aren't available, but most of those wouldn't be available on that card anyway, new driver or not. The only thing this really hurts is if Windows or one of the major "graphical task" companies does an update that breaks compatibility with the card, but as much noise as we in the tech world see about that, it really doesn't happen the vast majority of the time. You'll be fine.



4GB cards might have a harder time but the 8GB ones should be running games pretty dam well for 1080P at least.


----------



## GerKNG (Jun 23, 2021)

Zyll Goliath said:


> P.S.What happened with Fine Wine AMD?



Fine Wine?
you mean from a barely function pre alpha product to something that works as intended after years of patching and fixing?


----------



## xkm1948 (Jun 23, 2021)

One last F U to those who supported them during Fury days. Let it die, i parted with my FuryX as soon as I could. AMD makes some decent CPUs. But I wont be giving their GPU another cent for a long while


----------



## windwhirl (Jun 23, 2021)

Flyordie said:


> I can see dropping the 200 and 300 series as they are based on an older version of GCN. However, the Fury and Fury X cards, those should be supported until they end support for Vega 56/64 imho.


Vega is two generations ahead. Asking a bit much there. Plus the Fury's usability is set to be severely reduced due to having just 4 GB of VRAM.


----------



## delshay (Jun 23, 2021)

windwhirl said:


> Vega is two generations ahead. Asking a bit much there. Plus the Fury's usability is set to be severely reduced due to having just 4 GB of VRAM.



Some of the supported cards also have 4GB VRAM, so it's not that. Someone pointed out it has something to do with shaders.


----------



## Dr. Dro (Jun 23, 2021)

delshay said:


> Some of the supported cards also have 4GB VRAM, so it's not that. Someone pointed out it has something to do with shaders.



The shaders are identical to the ones used in Tonga and Polaris, being of GFX8 generation. The Fiji cards have an older display engine (it's not capable of HDMI 2.0), and an earlier generation geometry processor compared to what's in Polaris. They also cannot encode HEVC. Otherwise, the cards are pretty much binary compatible as far as compute stuff goes. This review of the RX 590 on AnandTech explains it all in far more detail than I could ever reasonably put in a forum post, and I highly recommend everyone read it.









						The AMD Radeon RX 590 Review, feat. XFX & PowerColor: Polaris Returns (Again)
					






					www.anandtech.com
				






xkm1948 said:


> One last F U to those who supported them during Fury days. Let it die, i parted with my FuryX as soon as I could. AMD makes some decent CPUs. But I wont be giving their GPU another cent for a long while



Long before I joined, I followed your struggles with the R9 Fury lurking the TPU forums. Man, I know your pain. AMD hasn't been exactly kind to flagship buyers until the current generation, all of them having their bizarre share of issues... R9 Fury guys probably just didn't have it as bad as the Vega Frontier Edition buyers. I had them all.



delshay said:


> From my understanding, there will be no more windows 10 support either if the card has moved to legacy. From my understanding it's tied to the hardware itself.     ..Please correct me if I'm wrong.



No future updates means that the card's WDDM model and shader model will no longer be updated, and they will cease to receive new API features, even if compatible with the hardware. This gap will only grow larger and larger as 21.5.2 ages against more current releases. However, Windows 10/11 is fully backwards compatible with all WDDM models back to Vista's 1.0 - the card will continue to function for the foreseeable future, until Microsoft deems that earlier display driver model revisions are either unsafe or unsuitable to the operating system's demands.

For example, on the NVIDIA side, the final Windows 10 release of the Tesla generation GPUs (GTX 8000 through 200 series, 342.01) are actually Windows 8.1 model 1.3 drivers, this is for both GeForce and Quadro. They will still work, and I sometimes use such an old graphics card for some retro gaming on my CRTs.


----------



## delshay (Jun 23, 2021)

Dr. Dro said:


> The shaders are identical to the ones used in Tonga and Polaris, being of GFX8 generation. The Fiji cards have an older display engine (it's not capable of HDMI 2.0), and an earlier generation geometry processor compared to what's in Polaris. They also cannot encode HEVC. Otherwise, the cards are pretty much binary compatible as far as compute stuff goes. This review of the RX 590 on AnandTech explains it all in far more detail than I could ever reasonably put in a forum post, and I highly recommend everyone read it.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



This is a question I was asking on Reddit. Can you not manually update Vulkan? ie download latest files, put them in the correct AMD folder(s) then install.


----------



## Dr. Dro (Jun 23, 2021)

delshay said:


> This is a question I was asking on Reddit. Can you not manually update Vulkan? ie download latest files, put them in the correct AMD folder(s) then install.



I'm not sure, I don't know if the graphics driver would know what to do with the updated runtime's newer extensions, even if you updated it manually. All in all, in my opinion, the best thing for these cards now is to be put on a Linux box, where they'll get a decent treatment for a few more years.


----------



## delshay (Jun 23, 2021)

Dr. Dro said:


> I'm not sure, I don't know if the graphics driver would know what to do with the updated runtime's newer extensions, even if you updated it manually. All in all, in my opinion, the best thing for these cards now is to be put on a Linux box, where they'll get a decent treatment for a few more years.



I got upvoted on Reddit when I ask this question & there was a developer in the thread as it was he who was complaining he wrote new vulkan extension only for AMD to stop support.     ..So a wild guess, I would say "yes", it looks like you can keep up-to-date on the Vulkan side of things..


----------



## Dr. Dro (Jun 23, 2021)

delshay said:


> I got upvoted on Reddit when I ask this question & there was a developer in the thread as it was he who was complaining he wrote new vulkan extension only for AMD to stop support.     ..So a wild guess, I would "yes", it looks like you can keep up-to-date on the Vulkan side of things..



I think I saw that post. Honestly, though... I understand the desire to keep on trucking with these cards, especially given the context and the ongoing situation, but it is what it is. Not much that we can do at this point, even if it's serviceable, it's just a matter of time until it isn't anymore. To most average joe users, this won't be an issue at least until 2023... but it is something we more advanced users tend to feel.

There's always a flip side, though. You might find some R9 Fury-class cards being sold for cheap. I wouldn't mind those $99 Nano cards being back...


----------



## Zyll Goliat (Jun 23, 2021)

Ok guys I just tried Rift Breaker Demo and it's seems that FSR working fine on ANY AMD/NVIDIA GPU and actual gains on R9 Fury are really good BUT here is the thing for me personally on 4K with FSR ON/Balanced FPS gains was EXCELLENT and Image quality didn't suffer that much at all but on lower resolution 1080p you could see that image was blurry and actual FPS gains didn't been that much here are the picture bellow









                                                              This is Example of the FSR when is OFF and when is ON/Balanced settings the game is Rift Breaker/Demo Resolution is 3840x2160 high settings GPU is R9 Fury Sapphire Nitro


----------



## Valantar (Jun 23, 2021)

Zyll Goliath said:


> Ok guys I just tried Rift Breaker Demo and it's seems that FSR working fine on any GPU and actual gains on R9 Fury are really good BUT here is the thing for me personally on 4K with FSR ON/Balanced FPS gains was EXCELLENT and Image quality didn't suffer that much at all but on lower resolution 1080p you could see that image was blurry and actual FPS gains didn't been that much here are the picture bellow
> 
> View attachment 205082
> 
> ...


That aligns with reviews - higher output resolutions deliver better performance gains and less image quality loss, both due to the high cost of native rendering at those resolutions and the higher input resolution used for FSR. There's a comprehensive table of input resolution per output resolution and quality level here, but as an example, 2160p 'performance' renders at 1080p, while 1080p 'performance' renders at 540p. It stands to reason that there is _a lot_ more material for the scaler to work with in the former case than in the latter. Similarly, 'quality' renders at 1440p for 2160p output, or 720p for 1080p output. When you're starting from something that already looks pretty good on its own - like a 1080p or 1440p image - it stands to reason that an upscaled version of this will look far better than something upscaled from an unacceptably low resolution.


----------



## Zyll Goliat (Jun 23, 2021)

Valantar said:


> That aligns with reviews - higher output resolutions deliver better performance gains and less image quality loss, both due to the high cost of native rendering at those resolutions and the higher input resolution used for FSR. There's a comprehensive table of input resolution per output resolution and quality level here, but as an example, 2160p 'performance' renders at 1080p, while 1080p 'performance' renders at 540p. It stands to reason that there is _a lot_ more material for the scaler to work with in the former case than in the latter. Similarly, 'quality' renders at 1440p for 2160p output, or 720p for 1080p output. When you're starting from something that already looks pretty good on its own - like a 1080p or 1440p image - it stands to reason that an upscaled version of this will look far better than something upscaled from an unacceptably low resolution.


Yeah I agree.....As I have 4k 28 inch monitor this game also looks more or less the same(img quality/performance vise) on 1440p with FSR Off and 4K FSR ON the things is that you still have more options to tweak your settings with the FSR because you can have FSR ON/Performance/Balanced/Quality/Ultra Quality so more variety between performance and image quality to tweak..........

Also this still don't change the fact that in the future we will loose driver support so any possible bugs/glitches/black sreens...etc will be there to stay as nobody in AMD will care for those cards any more........who knows maybe there is hope in moded drivers or switching on Linux....Either way I decide to put my R9 Fury on sale.......


----------



## delshay (Jun 23, 2021)

Fury cards have very good memory bandwidth due to having HBM. So yeah, it should still do very well at high resolution. I just don't get why AMD gave these cards the boot.


----------



## Zyll Goliat (Jun 23, 2021)

delshay said:


> Fury cards have very good memory bandwidth due to having HBM. So yeah, it should still do very well at high resolution. I just don't get why AMD gave these cards the boot.


Yeah totally R9 Fury cards but also R9 390/290 are still very capable cards today and they are not that old to be precise Fury series was top of the line AMD cards back in the summer of 2015 so not even 6 years old....


----------



## pavle (Jun 23, 2021)

*A*dios *M*y *D*ineros at it again - I still remember when they just couldn't wait to end support for their crappy driver for Win XP the 4th month of 2014. If they are so poor that they can't even support their products, they shouldn't be in business.
People all over the world should start really hating planned obsolescence - creates much trash for no good reason than the love of money (that is the root of all evil).
To hell with AMD and their crappy attitude. And I had AMD processors and ATI cards for ages, not anymore here no matter how many % points their ricer is faster than wintel!


----------



## Valantar (Jun 23, 2021)

pavl3 said:


> *A*dios *M*y *D*ineros at it again - I still remember when they just couldn't wait to end support for their crappy driver for Win XP the 4th month of 2014. If they are so poor that they can't even support their products, they shouldn't be in business.
> People all over the world should start really hating planned obsolescence - creates much trash for no good reason than the love of money (that is the root of all evil).
> To hell with AMD and their crappy attitude. And I had AMD processors and ATI cards for ages, not anymore here no matter how many % points their ricer is faster than wintel!


Planned obsolescence is indeed a terrible thing, but this isn't that. Planned obsolesence implies that the product in question is engineered to stop working at a given point so that users are forced to buy something new. These GPUs still work perfectly, and will most likely continue doing so for the foreseeable future. Nothing is forcing an upgrade except for the increasing demands of games and the relative performance delivered by newer hardware. Neither of which is due to how AMD is treating these GPUs. You can still use these GPUs just as you do today, with the same drivers, and they will work the same.



Zyll Goliath said:


> Yeah totally R9 Fury cards but also R9 390/290 are still very capable cards today and they are not that old to be precise Fury series was top of the line AMD cards back in the summer of 2015 so not even 6 years old....


They are - I'm still pretty happy with my Fury X, even if it's getting replaced as soon as I can get my hands on something new - but that doesn't mean it's particularly sensible to continue driver development for them. They could always keep an engineer or two tasked with bugfixes and stuff for old SKUs, but it's a difficult task - if there are bugs you likely need a proper team, and if not, then there's no work for them. Maintaining expertise for older architectures is also a challenge. And newer products will always be prioritized. Of course it's reasonable to argue that AMD should have a big enough driver development team to have the flexibility to handle this. I just don't see it as a major problem. Would a couple more years of driver development matter? I don't think so. For the types of games, settings and resolutions these GPUs can still handle (for example, my Fury X is definitely not a 1440p card any more in demanding titles, on matter the detail level), any driver optimizations for future titles aren't likely to make much of a difference. If a new AAA title runs at 30 or 40fps at 1440p medium ... doesn't matter, as the experience will still suck even with that 33% uplift. Similarly, if your esports title runs at 1080p120 or 1080p144? Again, rather meaningless overall. Bugfixes are of course another matter, but the only major (game-breaking) bug I can remember in the six years I've had this GPU has been hard crashing in Alien: Isolation. GCN is so well known at this point that mostly anything is likely to _work_ on it, even if it might not work _well_ (especially if the game in question relies on new features).


----------



## Zyll Goliat (Jun 23, 2021)

Valantar said:


> Planned obsolescence is indeed a terrible thing, but this isn't that. Planned obsolesence implies that the product in question is engineered to stop working at a given point so that users are forced to buy something new. These GPUs still work perfectly, and will most likely continue doing so for the foreseeable future. Nothing is forcing an upgrade except for the increasing demands of games and the relative performance delivered by newer hardware. Neither of which is due to how AMD is treating these GPUs. You can still use these GPUs just as you do today, with the same drivers, and they will work the same.
> 
> 
> They are - I'm still pretty happy with my Fury X, even if it's getting replaced as soon as I can get my hands on something new - but that doesn't mean it's particularly sensible to continue driver development for them. They could always keep an engineer or two tasked with bugfixes and stuff for old SKUs, but it's a difficult task - if there are bugs you likely need a proper team, and if not, then there's no work for them. Maintaining expertise for older architectures is also a challenge. And newer products will always be prioritized. Of course it's reasonable to argue that AMD should have a big enough driver development team to have the flexibility to handle this. I just don't see it as a major problem. Would a couple more years of driver development matter? I don't think so. For the types of games, settings and resolutions these GPUs can still handle (for example, my Fury X is definitely not a 1440p card any more in demanding titles, on matter the detail level), any driver optimizations for future titles aren't likely to make much of a difference. If a new AAA title runs at 30 or 40fps at 1440p medium ... doesn't matter, as the experience will still suck even with that 33% uplift. Similarly, if your esports title runs at 1080p120 or 1080p144? Again, rather meaningless overall. Bugfixes are of course another matter, but the only major (game-breaking) bug I can remember in the six years I've had this GPU has been hard crashing in Alien: Isolation. GCN is so well known at this point that mostly anything is likely to _work_ on it, even if it might not work _well_ (especially if the game in question relies on new features).


Well I can only wish that we as consumers can get certain amount of years of support so when we buy new product we know in ahead how long we can expect that those GPU's is going to be supported at least Nvidia cancel their driver support for Kepler but those cards are from 2012 so more than 8 years and also they said 4-5 month in ahead that they are going to do that from other side AMD just yesterday decide to cancel driver support for all those cards and it was  immediate decision which means that 21.6.1 latest driver from very same day do not works on those cards I don't know but for me that just looks ugly and unprofessional from AMD......


----------



## Valantar (Jun 23, 2021)

Zyll Goliath said:


> Well I can only wish that we as consumers can get certain amount of years of support so when we buy new product we know in ahead how long we can expect that those GPU's is going to be supported at least Nvidia cancel their driver support for Maxvell but those cards are from 2012 so more than 8 years and also they said 4-5 month in ahead that they are going to do that from other side AMD just yesterday decide to cancel driver support for all those cards and it was  immediate decision which means that 21.6.1 latest driver from very same day do not works on those cards I don't know but for me that just looks ugly and unprofessional from AMD......


Yeah, they should have announced it earlier, that's true. Again, not ultimately something that makes a difference in use or performance, but it's good not to blindside your users nonetheless. I'm guessing they held off simply because announcing this either alongside a new GPU lineup or in the beginning of a major shortage would have looked pretty bad. Still, it's not a good way of doing things.


----------



## RJARRRPCGP (Jun 23, 2021)

Maxwell isn't that old. I have one (a GTX 970) that I bought for not much on May 29, 2019, which is for my socket 1366 system and for a backup. That was after Kepler.


----------



## Zyll Goliat (Jun 23, 2021)

RJARRRPCGP said:


> Maxwell isn't that old. I have one (a GTX 970) that I bought for not much on May 29, 2019, which is for my socket 1366 system and for a backup. That was after Kepler.


Aye I was thinking on Kepler....my bad Nvida will cancel Kepler not Maxwell.......Fixed...and yeah GTX 900 series(Maxwell)will still have support and they are from 2014 even older then R9 Fury that supposed to be competition for GTX 980/980Ti......


----------



## windwhirl (Jun 23, 2021)

pavl3 said:


> *A*dios *M*y *D*ineros at it again - I still remember when they just couldn't wait to end support for their crappy driver for Win XP the 4th month of 2014. If they are so poor that they can't even support their products, they shouldn't be in business.



Windows XP lasted freaking 12 years, going for 13. Way more than any other Windows OS relevant to this discussion and by then already aged like milk. Perfectly understandable if AMD wanted to end support for it once and for all, specially since Microsoft made multiple announcements and campaigns the last 4 years before that to encourage people to move to a newer platform, with game devs also starting to require Windows 7 as a minimum requirement. Enough is enough.



pavl3 said:


> People all over the world should start really hating planned obsolescence - creates much trash for no good reason than the love of money (that is the root of all evil).


What Valantar said. Cards will still work, and no driver in the world can fix the fact that they're old and not good enough for what may come in the near future. Besides, other people will pick up these cards anyway and give it a few more years of use in systems where the lack of support is not an issue. So, plenty of life remaining for them even with AMD's announcement.


----------



## Colddecked (Jun 23, 2021)

Zyll Goliath said:


> Also this still don't change the fact that in the future we will loose driver support so any possible *bugs/glitches/black sreens.*..etc will be there to stay as nobody in AMD will care for those cards any more........who knows maybe there is hope in moded drivers or switching on Linux....Either way I decide to put my R9 Fury on sale.......



One thing to consider, as AMDs focus now shifts to RDNA isn't there more chance of bugs being introduced for older GCN cards on the driver side, the longer they keep including old GCN cards in driver updates?  So in that way, it makes sense to stop updating the drivers for them.  And in the unlikely event there's a game with an issue specific to old GCN more than likely it will get fixed by a developer patch.  So, while you do not get any performance increases via drivers anymore, I wouldn't worry about bugs/glitches/black screens.  Yes cutting off support for Fury and 390/290 sends a bad message, but its not as dire as you're making it out to be.


----------



## Zyll Goliat (Jun 23, 2021)

Colddecked said:


> One thing to consider, as AMDs focus now shifts to RDNA isn't there more chance of bugs being introduced for older GCN cards on the driver side, the longer they keep including old GCN cards in driver updates?  So in that way, it makes sense to stop updating the drivers for them.  And in the unlikely event there's a game with an issue specific to old GCN more than likely it will get fixed by a developer patch.  So, while you do not get any performance increases via drivers anymore, I wouldn't worry about bugs/glitches/black screens.  Yes cutting off support for Fury and 390/290 sends a bad message, but its not as dire as you're making it out to be.


I am not making it out anything I just expressing how I feel about this also seems that many many others owners of those cards feels the same or worse and as I said for me this just looks ugly and unprofessional....If you are fine with that It's OK you keep supporting them or even better you can urge them to cancel driver supports for your current RX 5700 and All Navi&Vega series of cards because it's probably better for AMD if they do not waste time and resources on that "old" tech anymore and concentrate only on 6000/Big Navi series of cards and beyond.....


----------



## Morbius2021 (Jun 23, 2021)

I think the long term support window that all hardware manufacturers are shooting for is going to be 3 years.

Microsoft has already made major changes to basic chipset support within the 5 years that windows 10  has been available.

Earlier releases of Windows 10, i.e. V1511 and 1603 had built in support for X99 intel chipsets, but current versions like 21H1 don't, so that is something that is being done on purpose.

Planned obsolescence.  Get used to replacing things more often, folks like to say, hey it still works.

How long until that isn't the case.  I can still find older chipset drivers for those chipsets, but even intel makes it hard to find them now.

if you have older drivers, ARCHIVE THEM, you never know when it will get harder to find them again.


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Jun 23, 2021)

Zyll Goliath said:


> "AMD confirmed it is retiring a large number of its graphics card today. Starting with Adrenalin 21.6.1 driver graphics card from Radeon Fury, Radeon 300, as well as Radeon 200 series, will no longer be supported, as all these cards have been moved to the legacy section"
> 
> View attachment 204950
> 
> ...


We had a news piece, I take it it's tone wasn't negative enough for you, lolz.

Drammmaaaa


----------



## RJARRRPCGP (Jun 23, 2021)

Zyll Goliath said:


> even better you can urge them to cancel driver supports for your current RX 5700 and All Navi&Vega series of cards because it's probably better for AMD if they do not waste time and resources on that "old" tech anymore and concentrate only on 6000/Big Navi series of cards and beyond.....


If that happens, AMD can expect an Atari-ET-level catastrophe! AMD could be dumping their video cards into a landfill. Because most people are unable to purchase one.


----------



## Valantar (Jun 23, 2021)

Zyll Goliath said:


> I am not making it out anything I just expressing how I fell about this also seems that many many others owners of those cards feels the same or worse and as I said for me this just looks ugly and unprofessional....If you are fine with that It's OK you keep supporting them or even better you can urge them to cancel driver supports for your current RX 5700 and All Navi&Vega series of cards because it's probably better for AMD if they do not waste time and resources on that "old" tech anymore and concentrate only on 6000/Big Navi series of cards and beyond.....


Hey, man, please take a breath. Your response here is in no way warranted by what you're responding to. Also, hi, current Fury X owner and daily user here, and I don't think this is particularly bad. Your impression of "many other owners" is not universal, nor even representative. This ought to have been announced earlier, sure, could have been handled better, but overall it's acceptable. 6 years (or more, depending on the SKU) of active driver development is fine. Not good, not great, but not bad either, just fine. Nobody here is arguing for anything less, nor that AMD's handling of this wasn't a bit iffy. Drawing up silly straw men and caricaturing the people who are (slightly) disagreeing with you only makes you look like you can't have a reasonable on-topic debate. There are nuances between "AMD good" and "AMD bad". The nuances is where debate gets interesting, right? So please stop trying to paint the people (slightly) disagreeing with you as ridiculous caricatures. It serves no constructive purpose whatsoever, and only poisons further debate.

In an ideal world, we'd get 10 years of active driver development for a GPU. And hopefully in the future we'll get that, given that generational performance gains have been on a decline for a decade. In ten years, it's highly unlikely that we'll be getting a 30% generation-on-generation improvement at the same power levels, so GPUs will last longer, necessitating longer driver development. But today, a 10-year-old GPU isn't going to perform on a level that driver optimizations will noticeably improve anything for new titles, and older titles should already be optimized (or at least are highly unlikely to receive future optimizations). The same goes for a 6-year-old flagship, as I exemplified above. And future bugs for a decade-old and widely supported architecture are relatively unlikely, except in advanced titles implementing new features that aren't really supported on hardware this old anyhow. And to expand on my previous example, if a feature in a new, graphically advanced AAA title breaks it so that it won't play on my Fury X, while a theoretical fix would have allowed me to play it at, say, 1080p medium 40fps ... does that matter? I'd say not. At that point, the game isn't playable at all. At that point it's the hardware that is holding the GPU back, not any lack of driver support. If I'm burning 300W of power to play at barely playable frame rates at a sub-par resolution, then I'd rather wait until I can upgrade my GPU. (Which, incidentally, is why a lot of AAA titles like Control and Metro: Exodus have been sitting in my library waiting for a GPU upgrade, as I'd rather have a good experience playing them than turning settings to "pixelated vaseline on my glasses" just to run it at all.)


----------



## Zyll Goliat (Jun 23, 2021)

Valantar said:


> Hey, man, please take a breath. Your response here is in no way warranted by what you're responding to. Also, hi, current Fury X owner and daily user here, and I don't think this is particularly bad. Your impression of "many other owners" is not universal, nor even representative. This ought to have been announced earlier, sure, could have been handled better, but overall it's acceptable. 6 years (or more, depending on the SKU) of active driver development is fine. Not good, not great, but not bad either, just fine. Nobody here is arguing for anything less, nor that AMD's handling of this wasn't a bit iffy. Drawing up silly straw men and caricaturing the people who are (slightly) disagreeing with you only makes you look like you can't have a reasonable on-topic debate. There are nuances between "AMD good" and "AMD bad". The nuances is where debate gets interesting, right? So please stop trying to paint the people (slightly) disagreeing with you as ridiculous caricatures. It serves no constructive purpose whatsoever, and only poisons further debate.
> 
> In an ideal world, we'd get 10 years of active driver development for a GPU. And hopefully in the future we'll get that, given that generational performance gains have been on a decline for a decade. In ten years, it's highly unlikely that we'll be getting a 30% generation-on-generation improvement at the same power levels, so GPUs will last longer, necessitating longer driver development. But today, a 10-year-old GPU isn't going to perform on a level that driver optimizations will noticeably improve anything for new titles, and older titles should already be optimized (or at least are highly unlikely to receive future optimizations). The same goes for a 6-year-old flagship, as I exemplified above. And future bugs for a decade-old and widely supported architecture are relatively unlikely, except in advanced titles implementing new features that aren't really supported on hardware this old anyhow. And to expand on my previous example, if a feature in a new, graphically advanced AAA title breaks it so that it won't play on my Fury X, while a theoretical fix would have allowed me to play it at, say, 1080p medium 40fps ... does that matter? I'd say not. At that point, the game isn't playable at all. At that point it's the hardware that is holding the GPU back, not any lack of driver support. If I'm burning 300W of power to play at barely playable frame rates at a sub-par resolution, then I'd rather wait until I can upgrade my GPU. (Which, incidentally, is why a lot of AAA titles like Control and Metro: Exodus have been sitting in my library waiting for a GPU upgrade, as I'd rather have a good experience playing them than turning settings to "pixelated vaseline on my glasses" just to run it at all.)


Hey man I am totally fine...I just don't get why you and some of the other guys in here have some kind of urge to convince me that this is all Cool&Nice when in my opinion it's definitely not and also here on this topic and all around the reddit and other forums you can clearly see that many other people share this opinion and I didn't lie when I said that many of them are really furious...personally I don't care that much as I never paid a lot for this card and I put it already on the sale,ironically I am even going to earn something out of this as I bought it few weeks prior this last mining craze......Again I just simply believe that AMD acted totally unprofessionally by cancelling support for certain GPU's and announcing this and cancelling their support just day before their new driver release......and That's it....that is enough for me and I am done with that company and their GPU department.......


----------



## freeagent (Jun 23, 2021)

The guy I bought my 980 Classified from had an R9 Fury.. hope I’m saying that right.. it has the AIO. I bet he is pretty choked right now. Actually probably not.. he probably has something new.

10 years is a pretty good run.. I am not disappointed they quit supporting Fermi.. I have one in use right now using a 2 or 3 year old driver..


----------



## Zyll Goliat (Jun 23, 2021)

freeagent said:


> The guy I bought my 980 Classified from had an R9 Fury.. hope I’m saying that right.. it has the AIO. I bet he is pretty choked right now. Actually probably not.. he probably has something new.
> 
> 10 years is a pretty good run.. I am not disappointed they quit supporting Fermi.. I have one in use right now using a 2 or 3 year old driver..


Actually R9 Fury X have AIO R9 Fury is air cooled and no those cards are not 10 years old those cards are from late 2015


----------



## Valantar (Jun 24, 2021)

Zyll Goliath said:


> Hey man I am totally fine...I just don't get why you and some of the other guys in here have some kind of urge to convince me that this is all Cool&Nice when in my opinion it's definitely not and also here on this topic and all around the reddit and other forums you can clearly see that many other people share this opinion and I didn't lie when I said that many of them are really furious...personally I don't care that much as I never paid a lot for this card and I put it already on the sale,ironically I am even going to earn something out of this as I bought it few weeks prior this last mining craze......Again I just simply believe that AMD acted totally unprofessionally by cancelling support for certain GPU's and announcing this and cancelling their support just day before their new driver release......and That's it....that is enough for me and I am done with that company and their GPU department.......


Sorry, but you're posting your opinions here, so you're by default exposing them to scrutiny, and the internal logic here doesn't add up.
- You say "personally I don't care that much", yet you're choosing to boycott AMD because of this. In a 2 GPU maker market, a boycott of one is a rather drastic measure. I'd say the second strongest one possible, with the only one above it being a lawsuit. So the severity of your response doesn't match with the stated intensity of your feelings.
- You say I and some others are "trying to convince you that this is all cool&nice" when at least I - I can't speak for anyone else, after all - have been plenty explicit in saying that I don't think this is good, I just don't find it particularly bad either. Neither "cool" nor "nice" have been words I've used, but at least in my vocabulary, those are stronger positive words than "okay", "meh", and "acceptable", which I have used. I've also gone specifically into the details of various aspects of this that I find more or less objectionable.
- Youre choosing to boycott a GPU maker on ethical grounds, yet ethics don't and can't exist in a vacuum. So I assume you're applying at least equally strict ethical judgements to all other GPU makers? I mean, how does this compare, in your opinion, to something like the GPP debacle? (Which, for the record, is still a thing, just limited to China.) Or Intels multi-decade history of bribing partners to stifle competition? Are monopolistic business practices less problematic to you than a slightly shorter than ideal period of driver support? Wouldn't you agree that the former is far more harmful to users in the middle to long term than the latter? And remember, nobody here is arguing that _shorter_ support periods than this would be okay, just that this duration (i.e. 6-10 years) is, overall, acceptable.

Also, "a lot of people on the internet are furious" is the eternal state of the universe, and is not an argument for nor against anything whatsoever. One needs to examine _why_ they are angry and attempt to identify whether the anger is justified or not. People get pissed off over the most ridiculously small and irrelevant things. All the while, you're here saying you don't care much about this, yet find it absolutely terrible, and spend your time portraying the people wanting to add some nuance to the debate as if they are saying everything is fine and dandy and there are no issues whatsoever. See how this is problematic? You're forcing the people who _slightly_ disagree with you into attempting to contradict caricatured stances that you're drawing up, rather than actually engaging in an intellectually honest good-faith discussion. Nobody here is saying that you're not entitled to whatever opinions you might have. But you're posting them on a forum, so you're by default exposing them to scrutiny and debate, and as such you owe it to the others on the forum to actually engage in said debate honestly and in good faith.


----------



## Zyll Goliat (Jun 24, 2021)

Valantar said:


> Sorry, but you're posting your opinions here, so you're by default exposing them to scrutiny, and the internal logic here doesn't add up.
> - You say "personally I don't care that much", yet you're choosing to boycott AMD because of this. In a 2 GPU maker market, a boycott of one is a rather drastic measure. I'd say the second strongest one possible, with the only one above it being a lawsuit. So the severity of your response doesn't match with the stated intensity of your feelings.
> - You say I and some others are "trying to convince you that this is all cool&nice" when at least I - I can't speak for anyone else, after all - have been plenty explicit in saying that I don't think this is good, I just don't find it particularly bad either. Neither "cool" nor "nice" have been words I've used, but at least in my vocabulary, those are stronger positive words than "okay", "meh", and "acceptable", which I have used. I've also gone specifically into the details of various aspects of this that I find more or less objectionable.
> - Youre choosing to boycott a GPU maker on ethical grounds, yet ethics don't and can't exist in a vacuum. So I assume you're applying at least equally strict ethical judgements to all other GPU makers? I mean, how does this compare, in your opinion, to something like the GPP debacle? (Which, for the record, is still a thing, just limited to China.) Or Intels multi-decade history of bribing partners to stifle competition? Are monopolistic business practices less problematic to you than a slightly shorter than ideal period of driver support? Wouldn't you agree that the former is far more harmful to users in the middle to long term than the latter? And remember, nobody here is arguing that _shorter_ support periods than this would be okay, just that this duration (i.e. 6-10 years) is, overall, acceptable.
> ...


I am saying that personally I am not "that"affected as I didn't pay that much for my GPU to be precise that card cost me 75€ OK so it's NOTHING to do with the money....It's more an ethical thing as I don't like to see when ANY big corp screwing over the little man and again don't matter if that company name Is Nvidia,Intel,AMD...etc... I said it before and I will repat again If those corps. do not have any kind of consequences for their moves they will do it again and again...so just wait when Nvida for example do the same or AMD next time decide to cancel driver supports for their products after 3 years....

And NO I am not asking other people to do anything I said what I am going to do and why and there is noting Radical there as I am not going to blow-out AMD building or something  I just going to avoid their products and that's it....Also I am not calling people around to boycott AMD products neither asking other card owners to sign petitions(yeah some people doing that also because of this)......I just share my opinion and ask other people what they think about it and that's it.......I respect your opinion and I am totally fine and cool If you think that this is not a big deal at all.....


----------



## Mussels (Jun 24, 2021)

Why do people think that the drivers not being updated makes your cards useless?

They'll work exactly as they do right this minute.

If they still kept updating them all these years and one user was like "mine works fine, lets not update" - was that users system useless? was he wrong?

Nah, the shit still works and will work for some time to come. Go through the driver logs, when was the last change that fixed things for this GPU architecture that benefited you?


----------



## Zyll Goliat (Jun 24, 2021)

Mussels said:


> Why do people think that the drivers not being updated makes your cards useless?
> 
> They'll work exactly as they do right this minute.


And Who said that???I don't think that card is going to be useless but is more likely(especially knowing AMD) that in some newer games there could be possible some driver related bugs/glitches etc....and from now on that ain't going to be fixed that's all.........


----------



## Vayra86 (Jun 24, 2021)

Zyll Goliath said:


> "AMD confirmed it is retiring a large number of its graphics card today. Starting with Adrenalin 21.6.1 driver graphics card from Radeon Fury, Radeon 300, as well as Radeon 200 series, will no longer be supported, as all these cards have been moved to the legacy section"
> 
> View attachment 204950
> 
> ...



1. Fine Wine was and still exists only in people's imagination. Fury never had the Fine Wine effect. In fact, only a handful of high end older cards did and those endowed with more VRAM than the rest of the crop at the same time, like the 7970. This was never a software thing, but a hardware / GPU balance trick. Its something that echoes with Nvidia's stacks too. The 6GB 980ti lasted. The 3GB 780's lasted, all much longer than their 2 and 4GB little sisters in the same gen. History repeats.

2. Really what do you expect to happen for these GPUs? They have support for all titles. They won't get much support for newer titles and the majority of them won't run that well anyway. What they WILL keep getting support for - just because the community demands it and PR damage will be too great - is bug fixing and making sure the stuff won't crash and burn running content, whatever it is. After all, if you have the API support, the contract you have with AMD is that the product can run those supported APIs. Nvidia does the same thing even for Kepler and other discontinued GPUs. Stuff runs on it just fine.

3. Note how the article says all of this but keeps it as guesswork, now combine that with your personal experience and surely we don't need a weird poll like you made it - I can't pick any of those three options tbh, they're all source material for a new flame war.

4. Relax. These products have had 8+ years of support and Fury was already falling off a few years earlier than today, it was clear the card was not supported well and likely due to really bad sales. Other than Fury, 200 and 300 series are rebranded crap.



Zyll Goliath said:


> And Who said that???I don't think that card is going to be useless but is more likely(especially knowing AMD) that in some newer games there could be possible some driver related bugs/glitches etc....and from now on that ain't going to be fixed that's all.........



Do some research on previous moves like this instead of entering rage mode. Historically the companies have fixed most of the glaring bugs even on older product that was still usable. Historically they also have some bugs (on both camps) that they just can't seem to fix or want to fix.


----------



## pavle (Jun 24, 2021)

While I acted furiously, it's true and it's not the first or second time either. They did the same thing in 2006 when all of a sudden they cancelled support for Radeon 11900 (X1900) and lower which was their best card of all time one could say (I still got 3 of those, 2 working); got bloody hot too.


----------



## Zyll Goliat (Jun 24, 2021)

Vayra86 said:


> 1. Fine Wine was and still exists only in people's imagination. Fury never had the Fine Wine effect. In fact, only a handful of high end older cards did and those endowed with more VRAM than the rest of the crop at the same time, like the 7970. This was never a software thing, but a hardware / GPU balance trick. Its something that echoes with Nvidia's stacks too. The 6GB 980ti lasted. The 3GB 780's lasted, all much longer than their 2 and 4GB little sisters in the same gen. History repeats.
> 
> 2. Really what do you expect to happen for these GPUs? They have support for all titles. They won't get much support for newer titles and the majority of them won't run that well anyway. What they WILL keep getting support for - just because the community demands it and PR damage will be too great - is bug fixing and making sure the stuff won't crash and burn running content, whatever it is. After all, if you have the API support, the contract you have with AMD is that the product can run those supported APIs. Nvidia does the same thing even for Kepler and other discontinued GPUs. Stuff runs on it just fine.
> 
> ...


Don't need to research anything I have enough years and personal experience also I have "few" other GPU's that do not have any more driver support so I know pretty much what is going to happened and there is No rage mode in here bud....seems like you are been upset more than me from some reason....



pavl3 said:


> While I acted furiously, it's true and it's not the first or second time either. They did the same thing in 2006 when all of a sudden they cancelled support for Radeon 11900 (X1900) and lower which was their best card of all time one could say (I still got 3 of those, 2 working); got bloody hot too.


I believe that X1900 was actually ATI card and AMD bought ATI that same year.....that and possibly introduction of DX 10 was the reason why they stop with the support of that card...just my 2 cents....


----------



## Vayra86 (Jun 24, 2021)

Zyll Goliath said:


> Don't need to research anything I have enough years and personal experience also I have "few" other GPU's that do not have any more driver support so I know pretty much what is going to happened and there is No rage mode in here bud....seems like you are been upset more than me from some reason....



Alright then maybe my reading comprehension of your poll options and three question marks in topic title, is entirely wrong. Though it does raise eyebrows  Similarly how your OP speaks of 'What happened to Fine Wine' as if it existed, is telling and the reason I wrote what I did.


----------



## Zyll Goliat (Jun 24, 2021)

Vayra86 said:


> Alright then maybe my reading comprehension of your poll options and three question marks in topic title, is entirely wrong. Though it does raise eyebrows


NP...Really...well srry English is not my native so....but yeah I am a bit upset about this and I said that....tho' there is no RAGE mode involved


----------



## Mussels (Jun 24, 2021)

Zyll Goliath said:


> And Who said that???I don't think that card is going to be useless but is more likely(especially knowing AMD) that in some newer games there could be possible some driver related bugs/glitches etc....and from now on that ain't going to be fixed that's all.........


You did, by putting it in the poll and twisting the wording.


----------



## Zyll Goliat (Jun 24, 2021)

Mussels said:


> You did, by putting it in the poll and twisting the wording.


I did really???How did I twist the words???...But OK fine if you said so....I really not going to argue as you are the Mod on this forum then PLS. Feel free to close this topic........


----------



## Aquinus (Jun 24, 2021)

Zyll Goliath said:


> I did really???How did I twist the words???


Your poll implies that the cards are useless because of the change when they're not. Dropping support and a device being unusable are two different things.


----------



## Mussels (Jun 24, 2021)

"Yes they are old and useless"
So anyone who thinks its fine the driver support ends, must also agree the cards are useless

You made a biased poll, what kind of reaction are you expecting?


----------



## Zyll Goliat (Jun 24, 2021)

Aquinus said:


> Your poll implies that the cards are useless because of the change when they're not. Dropping support and a device being unusable are two different things.





Mussels said:


> "Yes they are old and useless"
> So anyone who thinks its fine the driver support ends, must also agree the cards are useless
> 
> You made a biased poll, what kind of reaction are you expecting?


Nah that was not my intention but if you want you can change that poll answer(as Mod) and put just Yes as answer or what so ever you decide that is not "twisted" word because I can't change/edit that anymore.....but seems that maybe some of you guys simply do not want to discuss about this so as I said...let's close this topic...it's going to be better for you for me and for the BIG Corps ....


----------



## Valantar (Jun 24, 2021)

Zyll Goliath said:


> I am saying that personally I am not "that"affected as I didn't pay that much for my GPU to be precise that card cost me 75€ OK so it's NOTHING to do with the money....It's more an ethical thing as I don't like to see when ANY big corp screwing over the little man and again don't matter if that company name Is Nvidia,Intel,AMD...etc... I said it before and I will repat again If those corps. do not have any kind of consequences for their moves they will do it again and again...so just wait when Nvida for example do the same or AMD next time decide to cancel driver supports for their products after 3 years....
> 
> And NO I am not asking other people to do anything I said what I am going to do and why and there is noting Radical there as I am not going to blow-out AMD building or something  I just going to avoid their products and that's it....Also I am not calling people around to boycott AMD products neither asking other card owners to sign petitions(yeah some people doing that also because of this)......I just share my opinion and ask other people what they think about it and that's it.......I respect your opinion and I am totally fine and cool If you think that this is not a big deal at all.....


And we're at it again, sadly. Yes, it's clearly an ethical thing - I pointed that out myself, didn't I? I completely agree with not accepting corporations screwing over users, but ... is anyone really being screwed over here? _That _is after all the question. I'd say no - you've gotten 6-10 years of driver support for these products, and they will still work for future games within their capabilities (which is far more likely to hold them back than bugs). Any major bugs are likely to be hotfixed even if mainstream driver support is ended.



Zyll Goliath said:


> I said it before and I will repat again If those corps. do not have any kind of consequences for their moves they will do it again and again...so just wait when Nvida for example do the same or AMD next time decide to cancel driver supports for their products after 3 years....


This is what I'm talking about. You're extrapolating something _entirely_ unreasonable from something reasonable. 6-10 years of support is, IMO, fine. Five would be pushing it. Four would be unacceptable. Are AMD or Nvidia likely to take people not screaming from the rooftops about this as a sign that they can halve the minimum support period? That's extremely unlikely. Besides, these arbitrary numbers you're picking entirely disregards the basis for driver support, which is architecture development. Next up for EOL status is likely Polaris and Vega in perhaps a couple of years (though IMO likely a bit longer given the current use of Vega iGPUs), and whether RDNA1 and 2 will be supported concurrently or 1 will be droppe sooner depends on how different they are in terms of driver development - but all of that is more than half a decade out still. If AMD cut driver support after three years, I'd be furious. But six? I mean, I'm using the highest end, newest of the cut cards, I've owned it from launch, and I know that drivers aren't what is holding it back whatsoever. So the current state of things is perfectly fine.


Zyll Goliath said:


> And NO I am not asking other people to do anything


I never said that


Zyll Goliath said:


> I said what I am going to do and why and there is noting Radical there as I am not going to blow-out AMD building or something


Never said that either. Again, please stop making up straw men and portraying the people you're discussing with as if they're saying crazy things. It only makes you look like you're unable to present actual arguments, and is a transparent attempt at derailing debate and creating conflict, whether intentional or not.


Zyll Goliath said:


> I just going to avoid their products and that's it....


Yes, that's what a boycott is.


Zyll Goliath said:


> Also I am not calling people around to boycott AMD products neither asking other card owners to sign petitions(yeah some people doing that also because of this).....


Again, never said that either. I was questioning the internal logics of your stated feelings and opinions when compared to the sanctions you're effecting based on them.


Zyll Goliath said:


> I just share my opinion and ask other people what they think about it and that's it.......I respect your opinion and I am totally fine and cool If you think that this is not a big deal at all.....


But you clearly don't. The way you're responding here demonstrates that. You're using straw man arguments to make your opponents look bad, you're putting words in people's mouths, exaggerating the differences between what others are saying and what you are saying, and generally consistently arguing in bad faith. That does not indicate you being "totally fine and cool" with people having different opinions from you.

I also have to agree with @Mussels, @Vayra86 and @Aquinus that the poll options are pretty inflammatory. They seem explicitly written to incite a flame war. How? Through a severe lack of nuance and use of overblown wording, as well as conflating multiple variables. Some examples:
- It's entirely possible to think this is fine without thinking these GPUs are "useless". I think they're still perfectly usable (I'm still using one!), but I don't see how further driver development will help them much. You're forcing an alignment which doesn't exist between the questions "are these GPUs still useful?" and "is further driver development for them beneficial or useful?" In other words, an opinion perfectly in between your two first options is entirely possible, and leaving it out forces people to pick extreme options.
- The third option is, again, forcing people into a rather arbitrary side-taking. Fury GPUs aren't architecturally all that different from R9 290/390 cards, after all - the main difference is CU counts and the memory interface. There's little reason to think driver optimizations for one wouldn't apply to the other.
- The poll _fails_ to address _actually relevant_ questions, such as "how long do you think GPUs should have active driver support?" That would be a far less inflammatory and far more productive angle for a poll, would be far less likely to cause people to take stupid sides, and could lead to some interesting discussions around the intersection of usefulness, price, production economics, and the other relevant factors.


----------



## Zyll Goliat (Jun 24, 2021)

There is simply no point me answering anything anymore in here.....this discussion is over at least from me....you guys can close this topic or continue to accuse me for things you believe that I did or I wanted to do.....I will be totally fine what ever you decided to do....I Wish you all the best!!!Good Bye and Good Luck!!!


----------



## Aquinus (Jun 24, 2021)

Zyll Goliath said:


> you guys can close this topic or continue to accuse me for things you believe that I did or I wanted to do.


We're just saying that you came in with a particular bias that's apparently in your OP and poll. It's not what you said, it's how you said it. If you want a good and serious discussion, you should probably leave the hyperbole at the door.

Also one more point:


Valantar said:


> Fury GPUs aren't architecturally all that different from R9 290/390 cards, after all - the main difference is CU counts and the memory interface. There's little reason to think driver optimizations for one wouldn't apply to the other.


Fury is GCN 3 which is the same a the tonga chips. Hawaii/Grenada is GCN 2. This change makes sense if they're dropping support for GCN 3 and older. If they're still supporting other GCN 3 chips, then continuing support for the Fury lineup shouldn't be all that unrealistic, but not many chips used GCN 3 which is probably why it was lumped together with it.


----------



## GerKNG (Jun 24, 2021)

Finally...


----------



## Zyll Goliat (Jun 24, 2021)

Aquinus said:


> We're just saying that you came in with a particular bias that's apparently in your OP and poll. It's not what you said, it's how you said it. If you want a good and serious discussion, you should probably leave the hyperbole at the door.
> 
> Also one more point:
> 
> Fury is GCN 3 which is the same a the tonga chips. Hawaii/Grenada is GCN 2. This change makes sense if they're dropping support for GCN 3 and older. If they're still supporting other GCN 3 chips, then continuing support for the Fury lineup shouldn't be all that unrealistic, but not many chips used GCN 3 which is probably why it was lumped together with it.


I can only said that I am Srry. If I sad something wrong or twisted it was not my intention also back when I posted this topic no one didn't know anything about FSR and seeing that AMD cancelling driver support for those cards at the same time they releasing FSR didn't help at all...
Also I was the first in here who posted that FSR Working fine on those AMD cards in fact is working fine on any Nvidia/AMD cards and I posted that including the pictures and FPS/Image quality difference that I personally tested....And I said that is working excellent on R9 Fury so you guys can see that In fact have nothing Against AMD when they do something positive of course ...

Your argument about GCN 3 and why they possibly dropped support could be valid.....Also I just checked this latest 21.6.1. driver and it's unable to be installed on Fury but what I am finding strange is when you go on device mngr try to force driver install/have a disk/folder of 21.6.1/ and get the option to pick a card you can't find the R9 fury/290/390 or any 300, 200 series of cards which is expected but you can see some of those older cards





Sure it's probably some of the legacy driver that will be installed and that is just incorporated with this latest driver tho' its kinda weird that you can install "21.6.1"driver on those cards but you can't on R9 Fury/200/300 series of cards even tho none of them is been supported anymore......


----------



## Valantar (Jun 24, 2021)

Aquinus said:


> Fury is GCN 3 which is the same a the tonga chips. Hawaii/Grenada is GCN 2. This change makes sense if they're dropping support for GCN 3 and older. If they're still supporting other GCN 3 chips, then continuing support for the Fury lineup shouldn't be all that unrealistic, but not many chips used GCN 3 which is probably why it was lumped together with it.


Thx for the correction


----------



## Fouquin (Jun 24, 2021)

newtekie1 said:


> Remember when nVidia dropped support for cards after 12 years of support with 3 years of advanced notice and the AMD fanboys lost their minds? Well Fury owners got 6 years of support and then just dropped with no notice.
> 
> 
> So don't allow it to be enabled on cards it isn't supported, don't just drop all support for the cards entirely.



There is precedent for this. AMD dropped TeraScale with 16.2.1 less than 5 years after the last flagship shipped (HD 6990) and 2.5 years after Richland APUs shipped with TS2.0 IGPs.

That said certain families of Terascale got WDDM driver support until 2014; 8 years after their launch. The issue with multi generational architectures. Whatever comes last will be mature, but will die young.


----------



## Valantar (Jun 24, 2021)

Fouquin said:


> There is precedent for this. AMD dropped TeraScale with 16.2.1 less than 5 years after the last flagship shipped (HD 6990) and 2.5 years after Richland APUs shipped with TS2.0 IGPs.
> 
> That said certain families of Terascale got WDDM driver support until 2014; 8 years after their launch. The issue with multi generational architectures. Whatever comes last will be mature, but will die young.


That's true, though at the time AMD was also on the brink of bankruptcy. One would hope they have a bit more cash on hand these days, and thus could afford to support their products as long as they are relevant. I think they're doing pretty much doing that.


----------



## Vya Domus (Jun 24, 2021)

Zyll Goliath said:


> Well I can only wish that we as consumers can get certain amount of years of support so when we buy new product we know in ahead how long we can expect that those GPU's is going to be supported



You do get several years of support. Even if GPUs had a fixed amount of support I can guarantee you people would have complained instead that it should have been some arbitrary number of years to fit their wishes. The reality is that as long as someone, somewhere, is using these products they would have reacted in the same way no matter how long the support would have lasted.

There is no proper way for AMD to deal with this, they have to move on at some point and stop supporting old products that are out of production and therefore they generate zero profit for them.



Zyll Goliath said:


> Again I just simply believe that AMD acted totally unprofessionally by cancelling support for certain GPU's and announcing this and cancelling their support just day before their new driver release......and That's it....that is enough for me and I am done with that company and their GPU department.......


And this is how I know you have no understanding at all about any of this. What difference does it make if they announce it days prior or months in advance ? To whom is that information relevant ? To you ? People that buy used cards that are out of production for years? AMD wouldn't care, those cards don't make them any money and it makes no difference whatsoever to them when they announce that support ends. Only thing that's relevant to them is to offer support for the maximum time that an average user would have realistically kept a *new* card. That's it and 5 years is pretty decent, you're looking at at least 3 generations of new cards since then.

If you think you're gonna find something different anywhere else you're gonna be sorely disappointed.


----------



## Zyll Goliat (Jun 24, 2021)

Vya Domus said:


> You do get several years of support. Even if GPUs had a fixed amount of support I can guarantee you people would have complained instead that it should have been some arbitrary number of years to fit their wishes. The reality is that as long as someone, somewhere, is using these products they would have reacted in the same way no matter how long the support would have lasted.
> 
> There is no proper way for AMD to deal with this, they have to move on at some point and stop supporting old products that are out of production and therefore they generate zero profit for them.
> 
> ...


This simply it's not true....Actually I never ever heard that any other company cancel their driver-support in way AMD did this time....this was usually been done at least several months in advance sometimes even a year or more prior they decide to do move like this certainly not in a day or two like AMD did it.....



Yes that Kepler that was introduced in 2012....


----------



## Vya Domus (Jun 24, 2021)

Zyll Goliath said:


> Yes that Kepler that was introduced in 2012....



You still don't get it. Does any of that even matter ? Kepler cards run new games like utter crap, they perform way worse than the GPUs they were meant to compete with back in the day.





Look at this, a 780ti is slower than a 7790, remember that the 780ti was supposed to go up against the 290X. A card that is *2-3X faster than a 7790*, this is crazy. And it has nothing to do with VRAM, the 7790 has 2 GB. They are clearly capable hardware wise, since the 700 series was very competitive with AMD's 200 series many years ago.

So what does official support from Nvidia means in this case ? Jack all, that's what it means. You should be grateful your Fury didn't end up being utter trash like these "supported" Nvidia GPUs did.


----------



## Valantar (Jun 24, 2021)

Zyll Goliath said:


> This simply it's not true....Actually I never ever heard that any other company cancel their driver-support in way AMD did this time....this was usually been done at least several months in advance sometimes even a year or more prior they decide to do move like this certainly not in a day or two like AMD did it.....
> View attachment 205291
> Yes that Kepler that was introduced in 2012....


Well, most driver support cycles simply end with no announcement whatsoever, leaving users to look for themselves. GPUs are rather special in that regard. Heck, many products never get driver updates past the first year or so they are produced. So yes, AMD ought to have announced this a few months ago. It kind of sucks that they didn't. But ultimately it doesn't change anything, it just shows that they need to work on their communication.


----------



## erocker (Jun 24, 2021)

Where's the option for "doesn't matter I'll still be able to download a driver and the card will still be usable"?


----------



## Zyll Goliat (Jun 24, 2021)

Vya Domus said:


> You still don't get it. Does any of that even matter ? Kepler cards run new games like utter crap, they perform way worse than the GPUs they were meant to compete with back in the day.
> 
> View attachment 205298
> 
> ...


You actually cherry picked the game that benefit AMD cards....and no I am not saying that Kepler aged well it performs weak in DX 12 and Vulkan but there is still plenty of other games especially those sponsored by Nvidia that 780 Ti/Kepler performs fairly good ....Also I just give you the example how Nvidia acted in this case and not saying that I like Nvida in fact I don't care for neither of those company and NO I don't think that driver support will somehow magically improve GPU performance but I know that there is a bunch glitches,texture bugs....etc that are sometimes driver related and that's the point when you loose driver support most likely that is not going to be fixed anymore for those cards....

So let me give you the simple example...let's said that few of us R9 Fury owners are more than happy how this GPU performs and we do not care for 144Hz/FPS on high refresh monitors  no we just want to play games in 1080p or 1440p/60Hz ok....now how the things stands  Fury certainly have year or two of that raw power...but for example next month comes out a new game and I want to play that game and I know it can perform well on Fury but then here comes the problem glitches,bugs or missing textures and no it's not the devs fault it's a driver issue...and that's it you just can't play that game even if that GPU have the power to push enough fps.....


----------



## Vya Domus (Jun 25, 2021)

Zyll Goliath said:


> You actually cherry picked the game that benefit AMD cards....and no I am not saying that Kepler aged well it performs weak in DX 12 and Vulkan but there is still plenty of other games especially those sponsored by Nvidia that 780 Ti/Kepler performs fairly good



It's an extreme case but this is the norm with new games and part of the explanation for it is in fact driver optimization, or in this case the lack of it. 



Zyll Goliath said:


> I know that there is a bunch glitches,texture bugs....etc that are sometimes driver related and that's the point when you loose driver support most likely that is not going to be fixed anymore for those cards....



You are mixing things up, those things rarely have anything to do with drivers, if they are to be fixed it needs to happen on the application side.


----------



## Zyll Goliat (Jun 25, 2021)

Vya Domus said:


> It's an extreme case but this is the norm with new games and part of the explanation for it is in fact driver optimization, or in this case the lack of it.
> 
> 
> 
> You are mixing things up, those things rarely have anything to do with drivers, if they are to be fixed it needs to happen on the application side.


No I am not mixing things up at all....sure most of the times it's an app/game side and  devs should fix that but sometimes is the driver related and then it's  AMD/Nvida problem and they should fix that.....I mean every single time when new driver is released you can read Fixed issues by driver support team and usually there is some bug-driver-fixes that are related to the some new games....


----------



## Mussels (Jun 25, 2021)

erocker said:


> Where's the option for "doesn't matter I'll still be able to download a driver and the card will still be usable"?


great idea, implemented


----------



## AsRock (Jun 25, 2021)

xkm1948 said:


> One last F U to those who supported them during Fury days. Let it die, i parted with my FuryX as soon as I could. AMD makes some decent CPUs. But I wont be giving their GPU another cent for a long while



Yeah, think they should support for 10 years my self,  thankfully i did not buy in  Fury YAY.


----------



## Dr. Dro (Jun 25, 2021)

Followed the posts debating here, and well, I just have one last thought to pitch in. I think it's safe to say that what bothers people the most isn't that AMD dropped these cards, it's how they've done it. Earlier GCN generations have been stable in their operation for some time, earlier this year I had a Sapphire R9 280X Toxic in my hand (fine card, I must say) which I flipped to be able to afford my 5950X, and within its limitations (doesn't run DX12 games, for example), it's actually quite stable and performs to the fullest i'd say GCN can reasonably perform to.

Since the thread started, lots of evidence that FSR works on any hardware and any driver as long as the game itself can run, and I even tried it on my 3090 with great success, so I suppose that the matter is settled. Enjoy your cards however you can, plan an upgrade for when the market situation improves or your bank account doesn't feel it too much, or take the opportunity to learn something new and try Linux out. I've heard of a recent patch to the Intel 915 driver, and imagine how old that is!


----------



## eidairaman1 (Jun 25, 2021)

Actually they can, they are faster than rx 430s, 460s, 470s. GCN is GCN.


akzhangweiyi said:


> These cards can't support FidelityFX Super Resolution, that's it.





AsRock said:


> Knew some thing like this was going to happen, going on about support with FSR for the 1060, but nothing was said about the  290\390.
> 
> 
> 
> ...





windwhirl said:


> Vega is two generations ahead. Asking a bit much there. Plus the Fury's usability is set to be severely reduced due to having just 4 GB of VRAM.





delshay said:


> Some of the supported cards also have 4GB VRAM, so it's not that. Someone pointed out it has something to do with shaders.



Yet the GF 980 is supported. I suspect AMD clearing the path for winblows 11 but i wouldnt be surprised if they get flack for the r9 290/390 support loss on Reddit, GCN is GCN. irony is the rx 430 supports it and it cant handle games, the 290 is faster than 460s and trades blows with rx580s...


----------



## AsRock (Jun 25, 2021)

eidairaman1 said:


> Actually they can, they are faster than rx 430s, 460s, 470s. GCN is GCN.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Yeah, seems to me they just trying to get people pay up for the newer tech hahaha.  But is that even wise to even try how the markets been for gamers.

I hope it bites them in the ass, as for this pole it should of been on the front page.


----------



## Zyll Goliat (Jun 25, 2021)

AsRock said:


> Yeah, seems to me they just trying to get people pay up for the newer tech hahaha.  But is that even wise to even try how the markets been for gamers.
> 
> I hope it bites them in the ass.


Well yeah sure you are correct but that is also understandable in a tech world.....problem here is more the way they did and when because the current timing is really bad and even if the people want to get any other GPU they simply can't.....also could they prolong their support few more years at least for those cards that are still "valuable"....



Mussels said:


> Mussels said:
> 
> 
> > "Yes they are old and useless"
> ...


I see that you add 1 more answer in my poll using it your Mod-power and that's OK but instead of "Doesn't matter as I can still download drivers and use the GPU" you could just put 1 more word in between something like"Doesn't matter as I can still download OLD/Legacy drivers and use the GPU" and it will be actually much more accurate because like this maybe some people could get wrong impression that almost nothing is changed....but hey I am the one that twisting words and making biased polls right?
​Ok Guys bellow you can watch Interesting video about FSR and Nvida Game Filter ATTENTION At 10:35 Bryan/Tech Yes City also touched this subject that I been talking about in here.....










Oh surprise surprise....So either he also don't know nothing about anything or maybe...just maybe I am not crazy   after all....


----------



## Valantar (Jun 25, 2021)

Zyll Goliath said:


> Ok Guys bellow you can watch Interesting video about FSR and Nvida Game Filter ATTENTION At 10:35 Bryan/Tech Yes City also touched this subject that I been talking about in here.....
> 
> 
> Oh surprise surprise....So either he also don't know nothing about anything or maybe...just maybe I am not crazy  after all....


I just think that's a rather simplistic take. FSR is dependent on game implementations, right? So it should work on older AMD GPUs regardless of the driver. I mean, you demonstrated this yourself. So, while it's definitely poor timing in both the ways mentioned (the GPU shortage and FSR launch), poor timing doesn't affect the outcome of the change - which is ultimately very little.

So it comes back to: is it likely that future driver optimizations would have significantly impacted performance in future games for these GPUs? I don't think so. Again, whether you're getting 30 or 40 fps hardly matters, and that would be a _major _improvement in terms of driver optimization (~33% uplift). The 5-10% range is far more common, and 1.5-3fps isn't a noticeable change. Unplayable performance is still unplayable, and you'll still need to lower settings to get something playable. As for the secondary point of bugfixes: the only case where this is likely is a new title using new tech that hasn't historically been supported on these cards (i.e. a _major _game engine overhaul). Other than that, major bugs that developers can't fix are extremely unlikely. And there can still be hotfixes for significant bugs even if cards aren't included in mainstream driver releases. I would expect this to be the case if anything significant cropped up.



Zyll Goliath said:


> I see that you add 1 more answer in my poll using it your Mod-power and that's OK but instead of "Doesn't matter as I can still download drivers and use the GPU" you could just put 1 more word in between something like"Doesn't matter as I can still download OLD/Legacy drivers and use the GPU" and it will be actually much more accurate because like this maybe some people could get wrong impression that almost nothing is changed....but hey I am the one that twisting words and making biased polls right?


Doesn't seem necessary to me - the title of the thread is "AMD ends driver support [...]" after all. It stands to reason from this that any drivers available for download stem from the period it was supported, right? "Existing" might be a good option for a neutral word to underscore this if there really is a need for that, though I don't see the need. I like to think people have sufficient reading comprehension and short term memory to still remember the main takeaway from the topic of a thread after reading four sentences, and thus don't need that reminder.



xkm1948 said:


> One last F U to those who supported them during Fury days. Let it die, i parted with my FuryX as soon as I could. AMD makes some decent CPUs. But I wont be giving their GPU another cent for a long while





AsRock said:


> Yeah, think they should support for 10 years my self,  thankfully i did not buy in  Fury YAY.


Weird, I've been happy with my Fury X since day 1 - well, aside from the whiny pump, but my custom loop solved that. I've never really had significant driver issues, and I'm still using it to this day. Given the performance of this GPU today I don't see a problem with ending driver support - it doesn't perform to a level where future driver optimizations are likely to make much of a difference.


AsRock said:


> Yeah, seems to me they just trying to get people pay up for the newer tech hahaha.  But is that even wise to even try how the markets been for gamers.
> 
> I hope it bites them in the ass, as for this pole it should of been on the front page.


That's a bit of a stretch. Remember, these are 6-10 year old GPUs. Is ending support for that "trying to get people to pay up for their newer tech"? Or is it just a product nearing the end of its expected useful lifespan? Yes, they are still fully usable and perform decently, but this doesn't change that after all.


----------



## Zyll Goliat (Jun 25, 2021)

Valantar said:


> I just think that's a rather simplistic take. FSR is dependent on game implementations, right? So it should work on older AMD GPUs regardless of the driver. I mean, you demonstrated this yourself. So, while it's definitely poor timing in both the ways mentioned (the GPU shortage and FSR launch), poor timing doesn't affect the outcome of the change - which is ultimately very little.
> 
> So it comes back to: is it likely that future driver optimizations would have significantly impacted performance in future games for these GPUs? I don't think so. Again, whether you're getting 30 or 40 fps hardly matters, and that would be a _major _improvement in terms of driver optimization (~33% uplift). The 5-10% range is far more common, and 1.5-3fps isn't a noticeable change. Unplayable performance is still unplayable, and you'll still need to lower settings to get something playable. As for the secondary point of bugfixes: the only case where this is likely is a new title using new tech that hasn't historically been supported on these cards (i.e. a _major _game engine overhaul). Other than that, major bugs that developers can't fix are extremely unlikely. And there can still be hotfixes for significant bugs even if cards aren't included in mainstream driver releases. I would expect this to be the case if anything significant cropped up.


I really don't get where are you getting all of this?When did I ever said that dropping driver support is going to be some major impact on the overall GPU performance?That was never the issue again and again I keep repeating myself the real problem with dropping driver support could be unexpected certain errors,gliches,texture problems...etc especially in upcoming newer games but also let's not forget the upcoming Win 11....
And No driver related errors and fixes are not that unlikely as you believe let's just read their own support team info:




Ohh BTW those Fixed Issues and Known Issues are longer than this I just did the print screen and also this is ALL from 1(ONE) driver release....Every time new driver is released you can find more or less the same wall of text(or bigger) with the Fixed issues,Known issues,Support for New and latest games...etc...

Has AMD Killed Off Old GPU Drivers Too Soon?​







07:54 - Has AMD Ended Old GPU Support Too Soon?


----------



## Valantar (Jun 25, 2021)

Zyll Goliath said:


> I really don't get where are you getting all of this?When did I ever said that dropping driver support is going to be some major impact on the overall GPU performance?That was never the issue


I never said that you (or anyone) said that dropped driver support would _reduce_ performance, I said that one of the possible scenarios being drawn up is that we will no longer get _improved_ performance from driver optimizations. I then argued why this argument is irrelevant.

As to


Zyll Goliath said:


> again and again I keep repeating myself the real problem with dropping driver support could be unexpected certain errors,gliches,texture problems...etc especially in upcoming newer games but also let's not forget the upcoming Win 11....


see:


Valantar said:


> As for the secondary point of bugfixes: the only case where this is likely is a new title using new tech that hasn't historically been supported on these cards (i.e. a _major _game engine overhaul). Other than that, major bugs that developers can't fix are extremely unlikely. And there can still be hotfixes for significant bugs even if cards aren't included in mainstream driver releases. I would expect this to be the case if anything significant cropped up.


So, I addressed that, right?

And yes, all driver releases have long lists of both fixed bugs and as-of-yet unfixed bugs. That is entirely normal. Some bugs are even never fixed, as the cause might not be found. Some of these bugs are _extremely_ rare - maybe 1 in 1000 or 10 000 users of a specific GPU find them. Thus they might never be properly identified and fixed. Is that good enough? Arguably not, but troublehsooting issues this rare can be extremely difficult and require extremely specific hardware and software configurations to replicate. YMMV, as always with PCs. Nothing is ever entirely bug free.

What I would ask you: how many of these known or recently fixed issues relate explicitly (as in: it's stated in the changelog) to the GPUs in question? Over, say, the past year, how many bugs have appeared and been fixed for these GPUs? Because if they aren't mentioned, then they aren't having those issues. And this far into the lifecycle of these architectures, the default assumption is that all major bugs have long since been identified and fixed. Your stance implies that there is a signficant risk of future major bugs that will render these GPUs unusable in specific scenarios. For that to be the case, there would likely be a significant amount of recent bugs as well - both reported and fixed - as game engine and GPU driver developments are very incremental and derivative. And if there isn't, then you can relax and feel safe that this is likely to continue to be true.



Zyll Goliath said:


> 07:54 - Has AMD Ended Old GPU Support Too Soon?


... something being a topic for discussion does not mean that it is necessarily a major issue. Proof of attention is only proof of attention, not of a problem. And opinions differ, after all.


----------



## Mussels (Jun 25, 2021)

Nah, those known issues are just when they were discovered - they arent all new bugs just added to the last driver"

Look at nvidia with monitoring software breaking VR for a YEAR, it was in the release notes long after the bug came out, too


----------



## ratirt (Jun 25, 2021)

Still the same debate. Some people will never understand.
And the arguments. AMD is making people buy a new tech? Fury is still an eligible graphics? Come on. really? 
As far as some of you get the ending driver support for graphics some of you twist it to prove their imaginary point or something they believe so blindly is true.
And again. Fury to be supported and running new AAA games with sufficient FPS is wishful thinking (aka you expect miracle) and driver support for this is simply not gonna make the card run faster than it already does. It's just not possible and saying that Fury driver support end is a scheme for AMD for these users to buy a new card (which means taking their money) is such an utter bullshit I've got no words to describe it. And yet same people saying this, complain about lack of graphics cards performance advancement or they are not that fast in comparison to older stuff. It's such an absurd and hypocrisy. It's like people are getting addicted to a fuss, throwing in misconception to fuel the fuss and absurd further.


----------



## Zyll Goliat (Jun 25, 2021)

Valantar said:


> I never said that you (or anyone) said that dropped driver support would _reduce_ performance, I said that one of the possible scenarios being drawn up is that we will no longer get _improved_ performance from driver optimizations. I then argued why this argument is irrelevant.
> 
> As to
> 
> ...


Srry, but you did replay on my text then keep saying things that I or in fact no one in here ever said  at least not that I am aware....So after all that was only yours internal thoughts and just some kind of theorycrafting?ahh now I get it....this also probably explains some of yours previous responds to my posting....



Mussels said:


> Nah, those known issues are just when they were discovered - they arent all new bugs just added to the last driver"
> 
> Look at nvidia with monitoring software breaking VR for a YEAR, it was in the release notes long after the bug came out, too


Yeah right.....and then some new games come's out and they discover some new issues....guess what's happened when you don't have the driver support for your product.....


----------



## Valantar (Jun 25, 2021)

Zyll Goliath said:


> Srry, but you replay on my text then keep saying things that I or in fact no one in here ever said at least not that I am aware....So after all that was only yours internal thoughts and just some kind of theorycrafting?ahh now I get it....this also probably clear some of yours previous responds to my posting....


The reason I keep mentioning driver optimizations is that this is the _actual_, tangible, real-world gain that users frequently get from driver updates. It is, in the grand scheme of things, a realistic expectation. In this case though, that's not relevant, as the gains will not be large enough. That's why it keeps getting mentioned. But you're right, you're not arguing that, so I'll stop as well. At least we agree on that point.


As for the rest ... uh, what are you talking about? Theorycrafting? I'm pointing out that the amount of bugs found on architectures that old are extremely small, and that any new major bugs are likely to come from entirely new game engines with new features that aren't supported by the architecture. Who knows how UE5 will work on these? But also, who cares how UE5 will work on cards that aren't likely to be able to run UE5 games at any kind of playable performance? And, as I've said before, it's relatively common to see hotfix drivers for major issues even with unsupported hardware. So if something breaks fundamentally, it's still likely to get fixed (or there might be an advisory to downgrade to a previous driver or similar). (It's also relatively unlikely that a new game engine will fundamentally break compatibility with a decade's worth of consoles and PCs unless it's implementing mandatory features that these architectures lack, such as RTRT.)

I mean, I asked you a very specific question: how many bugs related to the now-unsupported GPUs can you find in the past year? Are they game or feature specific, or are they more significant? And have they been fixed? If a) the number is low, b) the issues found are highly specific, and c) the issues haven't been fixed by now, then this announcement effectively changes nothing. You're the one insisting this is a real problem, thus the onus is on you to provide evidence to support this.

From a quick skim of the changelogs for previous drivers listed on AMD's site (going back to september), searching for "GCN", here's what I found:


> A system hang or crash may be experienced when upgrading Radeon Software while an Oculus™ VR headset is connected to your system on Radeon GCN graphics products
> Reported in 21.2.2, fixed in 21.3.1 (two versions later)
> 
> Project CARS 3™ may experience mirror like corruption when using VR during game menus on GCN based Radeon graphics products.
> Listed in 20.9.1, can't find a mention of it as fixed, but it disappeared from "Known issues" after this. Likely fixed by a game update (or maybe an Oculus driver update)?


And that's it for mentions of GCN, at least. There are no mentions of "R9" or "Fury" outside of the compatibility lists. I didn't search of anything older. As such, it seems that a grand total _two_ issues relating to these cards have been found and addressed in the past 9 monts, one of which seemingly by a game update rather than a driver update, and both of them are highly niche and specialized. And given VR performance on the now-unsupported GPUs, it's quite unlikely that these were the GPUs on which the issue was found.

What I'm trying to get across here: the scenario that you are scared of is _extremely _unlikely to come to pass. If no issues were found in the past 9 months - a period in which hundreds of games have been released! - why would they appear in the next 9? Or the 9 after that? And at that point, would it at all be worth discussing, given the actual performance of these GPUs?


----------



## Zyll Goliat (Jun 25, 2021)

Valantar said:


> The reason I keep mentioning driver optimizations is that this is the _actual_, tangible, real-world gain that users frequently get from driver updates. It is, in the grand scheme of things, a realistic expectation. In this case though, that's not relevant, as the gains will not be large enough. That's why it keeps getting mentioned. But you're right, you're not arguing that, so I'll stop as well. At least we agree on that point.
> 
> 
> As for the rest ... uh, what are you talking about? Theorycrafting? I'm pointing out that the amount of bugs found on architectures that old are extremely small, and that any new major bugs are likely to come from entirely new game engines with new features that aren't supported by the architecture. Who knows how UE5 will work on these? But also, who cares how UE5 will work on cards that aren't likely to be able to run UE5 games at any kind of playable performance? And, as I've said before, it's relatively common to see hotfix drivers for major issues even with unsupported hardware. So if something breaks fundamentally, it's still likely to get fixed (or there might be an advisory to downgrade to a previous driver or similar). (It's also relatively unlikely that a new game engine will fundamentally break compatibility with a decade's worth of consoles and PCs unless it's implementing mandatory features that these architectures lack, such as RTRT.)
> ...


Ok seems like we finally agree upon something......Also YES as certain GPU gets older the drivers should be more polished or at least that is supposed to be the case......but again also in newer games/apps it's not that uncommon at all that things can go wrong even with more polished drivers....
Now saying this from my personal experience with R9 Fury for example in past 6-7 month I have certain driver-issues in some games freesync tends to goes bye-bye and make games to stutter that actually happened mostly in War Thunder after their last major update....crazy thing is that with some older driver seems to works fine again.......So my point is that's not always going to happened some major groundbreaking problems but instead more likely could be some small but very annoying things that nobody going to fix anymore.....


----------



## Valantar (Jun 25, 2021)

Zyll Goliath said:


> Ok seems like we finally agree upon something......Also YES as certain GPU gets older the drivers should be more polished or at least that is supposed to be the case......but again also in newer games/apps it's not that uncommon that things can go wrong even with more polished drivers....
> Now saying this from my personal experience with R9 Fury for example in past 6-7 month I have certain driver-issues in some games where freesync tends to goes bye-bye and make certain games to stutter that actually happened mostly in War Thunder after their last major update....crazy thing is that with some older driver seems to works fine again.......So my point is that's not going to happened  always some major groundbreaking problem but instead could be some small but very annoying things that nobody going to fix anymore.....


But if a _game update_ breaks a feature, is that AMD's responsibility to fix? Isn't it rather the game developer's problem? Whether or not it works with an earlier driver is irrelevant if the problem is introduced through a game update. If the game is still supported, the developer can fix it, and only if they are unable would this be AMD's responsibility. And to reiterate, if there is a major issue with a major game - let's say Fortnite suddenly breaks on GCN in some weird way that Epic can't fix - it's extremely likely that AMD fix it and issue an out-of-band hotfix driver release even if these GPUs are unsupported.

And, again:


Zyll Goliath said:


> but again also in newer games/apps it's not that uncommon that things can go wrong even with more polished drivers....


I just showed you that in the past nine months, there have been _two_ reported issues with GCN GPUs at all (and those might well be 400 and 500 series, who knows?), and both of these have been in highly specific niche use cases. So, in recent history, nothing _has_ gone wrong, but you're insisting that it likely _will_. At this point, you are contradicting the only relevant evidence we have in order to support your view of this being a significant problem. Will something break at some point? No doubt. Will this matter - i.e. would that game be playable on those GPUs at all if it were bug-free? Most likely not.

Which brings us back to the core issue: the GPUs still work, they still perform the same, and they have been doing so for anything from six to ten years. If some game breaks in the future ... is that really a major failing on AMD's part? Or are your expectations unreasonable?


----------



## Zyll Goliat (Jun 25, 2021)

Valantar said:


> But if a _game update_ breaks a feature, is that AMD's responsibility to fix? Isn't it rather the game developer's problem? Whether or not it works with an earlier driver is irrelevant if the problem is introduced through a game update. If the game is still supported, the developer can fix it, and only if they are unable would this be AMD's responsibility. And to reiterate, if there is a major issue with a major game - let's say Fortnite suddenly breaks on GCN in some weird way that Epic can't fix - it's extremely likely that AMD fix it and issue an out-of-band hotfix driver release even if these GPUs are unsupported.
> 
> And, again:
> 
> ...


Well depend's really you know that Big Game Developers communicate regularly with the AMD/Nvidia also we all know that certain games are actually sponsored by AMD or Nvidia and then those games usually works better on their products right......
I really do not want to argue with your internal thoughts again....I don't have any unreasonable expectations...It was Ugly and totally unprofessional from AMD to cancel their support for some of those cards especially the way they did it was just horrendous....Ahh now when I think about it I Actually lied....My expectation from R9 Fury is that I hope that I am going to get at least some buck for it,which is going to help me to switch on Nvidia or even possibly Intel GPU's......


----------



## Deleted member 197223 (Jun 25, 2021)

290/X was still cool like 5 years ago. It will always function as a decent space heater for anyone scared it might ever stop working or be useful for anything else.

480/970 is pretty much where I draw the line for minimum specs these days.


----------



## Zyll Goliat (Jun 25, 2021)

Bork Bork said:


> 290/X was still cool like 5 years ago. It will always function as a decent space heater for anyone scared it might ever stop working or be useful for anything else.
> 
> 480/970 is pretty much where I draw the line for minimum specs these days.


Aye...I hear you....thing is that actually R9 Fury is almost always faster then RX 480/580 or GTX 970  even beats  GTX 980 regularly.....Sometimes in games that use DX12/Vulkan and relay heavily on Async compute especially on higher res. R9 Fury beats easily 980Ti or even GTX 1070....here bellow is a good example from the game Strange Brigade



Heck...here It's even beats Vega 56,RX 5600Xt,GTX 1070TI,RTX 2060....It's a shame that this card lost driver support prematurely.....


----------



## Valantar (Jun 25, 2021)

Zyll Goliath said:


> Well depend's really you know that Big Game Developers communicate regularly with the AMD/Nvidia also we all know that certain games are actually sponsored by AMD or Nvidia and then those games usually works better on their products right......
> I really do not want to argue with your internal thoughts again....I don't have any unreasonable expectations...It was Ugly and totally unprofessional from AMD to cancel their support for some of those cards especially the way they did it was just horrendous....Ahh now when I think about it I Actually lied....My expectation from R9 Fury is that I hope that I am going to get at least some buck for it,which is going to help me to switch on Nvidia or even possibly Intel GPU's......


You know that the rhetorical tactic of labeling your opponents' views as "internal thoughts", "theorycrafting" and similar terms clearly meant to label them as out of touch with reality and purely subjective is an incredibly transparent bad-faith arguing tactic, right? Please stop. Seriously. You're just underscoring the impression that you're not able to maintain a respectful and intellectually honest debate.

You say you don't have unreasonable expectations. (Yeah, let's move on from the idea of making money off a 6-year-old GPU....) So you think driver support beyond 6-10 years is reasonable. Do you have any arguments to support that, beyond baseless and context-free conjecture like "something might break at some point"? Because I have provided evidence that for the past 9 months, there have been no significant bugs reported or fixed for these GPUs, and that the bugs reported and fixed were minor, niche applications. You're arguing against evidence, yet providing no evidence to support your own claims. That means you a) need to prove that my evidence is either not relevant or doesn't show what I say it does, or b) that there is reason to believe this past evidence is not a good basis for future expectations. So far you have done neither.

And again, you're conflating _how AMD announced this_ with _the effects of support being dropped_. These are two entirely separate factors with no effect on each other. I agree that the former was problematic, and AMD ought to have announced this differently. But that has no effect whatsoever on the real-world consequences of these GPUs not getting future driver updates.

As for using Strange Brigade as an example ... that game has an all-time concurrent peak player count on Steam of 1954 players.  In the month it launched. After that, player numbers have fluctuated a lot (with several months peaking >1000), but are generally in the low hundreds. Quite a few months have had less than 100 concurrent players as the highest number. So: this is a somewhat old game (August 2018), which while technologically interesting is quite unrepresentative of both gaming performance today and player preferences.

Regarding GPU maker-game developer collaborations (and sponsorships) I frankly don't see how they are relevant here. Are you saying that AMD should (or would?) provide longer support if a game was sponsored? Or that they won't if it isn't? I really don't understand how this has any bearing on the topic here. Whether these games actually work better on sponsor hardware or not is also highly variable. Often it just means that the game implements some vendor-specific features (TressFX, Hairworks, etc.).

If you can't provide either compelling arguments or actual evidence to support your assertion that future games (that would otherwise perform at a playable level) are likely to break, then we have reached an impasse.


----------



## Deleted member 197223 (Jun 25, 2021)

Zyll Goliath said:


> Aye...I hear you....thing is that actually R9 Fury is almost always faster then RX 480/580 or GTX 970  even beats  GTX 980 regularly.....Sometimes in games that use DX12/Vulkan and relay heavily on Async compute especially on higher res. R9 Fury beats easily 980Ti or even GTX 1070....here bellow is a good example from the game Strange Brigade
> 
> Heck...here It's even beats Vega 56,RX 5600Xt,GTX 1070TI,RTX 2060....It's a shame that this card lost driver support prematurely.....


Aye. While Fury X was was a cool concept I feel like it was too ahead of its time just like how 290/X was an over-engineered card. Besides, for the cards I mentioned I was targeting 1080p. Not to mention the price and age of said cards. Though I guess 390 would better fit that description. Meanwhile I will keep GTX 1080/Vega 56 as the "Recommended GPU" til they get fazed out and then only go RT from there. 

Hopefully we'll see better drivers now that GCN 1-3 has been put to rest.


----------



## Zyll Goliat (Jun 25, 2021)

Bork Bork said:


> Aye. While Fury X was was a cool concept I feel like it was too ahead of its time just like how 290/X was an over-engineered card. Besides, for the cards I mentioned I was targeting 1080p. Not to mention the price and age of said cards. Though I guess 390 would better fit that description. Meanwhile I will keep GTX 1080/Vega 56 as the "Recommended GPU" til they get fazed out and then only go RT from there.
> 
> Hopefully we'll see better drivers now that GCN 1-3 has been put to rest.


Hmmm knowing the AMD I doubt anything will change ever in their GPU driver department...it's always been let's said "Hit or Miss" and they always lack behind the current opponent and I actually have the feeling that they can not control their own hardware properly that many times seems far superior  but simply just failed to deliver....... something like that old Pirelli commercial used to say :"Power is Nothing Without Control"...


----------



## 80-watt Hamster (Jun 25, 2021)

What's funny is that you can still buy 5450s new.  And that's on TeraScale.

I'm hoping Fury pricing in particular craters, so I can grab a few for crunching.

EDIT:  Mistakenly claimed TeraScale 2


----------



## AsRock (Jun 25, 2021)

Valantar said:


> I just think that's a rather simplistic take. FSR is dependent on game implementations, right? So it should work on older AMD GPUs regardless of the driver. I mean, you demonstrated this yourself. So, while it's definitely poor timing in both the ways mentioned (the GPU shortage and FSR launch), poor timing doesn't affect the outcome of the change - which is ultimately very little.
> 
> So it comes back to: is it likely that future driver optimizations would have significantly impacted performance in future games for these GPUs? I don't think so. Again, whether you're getting 30 or 40 fps hardly matters, and that would be a _major _improvement in terms of driver optimization (~33% uplift). The 5-10% range is far more common, and 1.5-3fps isn't a noticeable change. Unplayable performance is still unplayable, and you'll still need to lower settings to get something playable. As for the secondary point of bugfixes: the only case where this is likely is a new title using new tech that hasn't historically been supported on these cards (i.e. a _major _game engine overhaul). Other than that, major bugs that developers can't fix are extremely unlikely. And there can still be hotfixes for significant bugs even if cards aren't included in mainstream driver releases. I would expect this to be the case if anything significant cropped up.
> 
> ...



8 tops, 290 was 2013 and 390 was 2015. Last time they did it they removed all the drivers so you could not even try a newer version unless you installed the old drivers 1st.

Anyways any thing lower than 10 years is just BS, never mind just dropping this on people at a time like now is just blind ignorance, like a big FU.  Well just another sign they don't give a flying fck, which is like most company's once they have your money.


I hope at least they keep the drivers in the newer package but just say the feature is not available even though they are supporting nVidia's 1060 which is the same time frame and supported.  They really trying to push me to buy nVidia and not AMD ?, what a bunch of twats.


----------



## Zyll Goliat (Jun 25, 2021)

AsRock said:


> 8 tops, 290 was 2013 and 390 was 2015. Last time they did it they removed all the drivers so you could not even try a newer version unless you installed the old drivers 1st.
> 
> Anyways any thing lower than 10 years is just BS, never mind just dropping this on people at a time like now is just blind ignorance, like a big FU.  Well just another sign they don't give a flying fck, which is like most company's once they have your money.
> 
> ...


10 years will be ideal...8 years it's still Ok I guess....but now here we come to the 5 years.....what's next 3,2,1...but hey don't you worrie they will make sure to let you know 24h prior they decide to cancel support for their products.....that's really top notch service....


----------



## Ellertis (Jun 26, 2021)

Zyll Goliath said:


> "AMD confirmed it is retiring a large number of its graphics card today. Starting with Adrenalin 21.6.1 driver graphics card from Radeon Fury, Radeon 300, as well as Radeon 200 series, will no longer be supported, as all these cards have been moved to the legacy section"
> 
> View attachment 204950
> 
> ...


I saw a guy on reddit running a fury x with FSR in dota2


----------



## delshay (Jun 27, 2021)

AsRock said:


> Yeah, seems to me they just trying to get people pay up for the newer tech hahaha.



Of coarse they are, but look at who they are targeting. Users who bought expensive cards at that time. I'm am one of them who paid full price when they first came out.. (R9 Nano User).

So they think we can afford the latest cards because we bought expensive cards in the past.  & on top of this you don't even get HBM. If they want me to part with £1000+, then I want HBM, That's what all user should be demanding with these expensive cards.


----------



## AsRock (Jun 27, 2021)

delshay said:


> Of coarse they are, but look at who they are targeting. Users who bought expensive cards at that time. I'm am one of them who paid full price when they first came out.. (R9 Nano User).
> 
> So they think we can afford the latest cards because we bought expensive cards in the past.  & on top of this you don't even get HBM. If they want me to part with £1000+, then I want HBM, That's what all user should be demanding with these expensive cards.



My 290X ( originally ) set me back $650.

They only just started to look interesting to me again, although the shortage has made them none interesting afterwards haha.

Must be nice to be able to release them to scalpers so you do not have to cover with a warranty ( for most part ).  So they are not going give a flying fck.


----------



## Zyll Goliat (Jun 27, 2021)

delshay said:


> Of coarse they are, but look at who they are targeting. Users who bought expensive cards at that time. I'm am one of them who paid full price when they first came out.. (R9 Nano User).
> 
> So they think we can afford the latest cards because we bought expensive cards in the past.  & on top of this you don't even get HBM. If they want me to part with £1000+, then I want HBM, That's what all user should be demanding with these expensive cards.





AsRock said:


> My 290X ( originally ) set me back $650.
> 
> They only just started to look interesting to me again, although the shortage has made them none interesting afterwards haha.
> 
> Must be nice to be able to release them to scalpers so you do not have to cover with a warranty.


I do feel with you guys........@Delshay well those new AMD cards getting ddr6 and sure memory bus is 256 bit(only)  but bandwidth is more or less on par with HBM (512 GB/s) talking about 6900&6800...so don't worry there are no issues there....but yeah the current prices and availability are just insane + after that AMD cancel their support for those cards and the way they handle that now draws me towards Nvidia or maybe new Intel GPU's....


----------



## eidairaman1 (Jun 28, 2021)

Zyll Goliath said:


> I do feel with you guys........@Delshay well those new AMD cards getting ddr6 and sure memory bus is 256 bit(only)  but bandwidth is more or less on par with HBM (512 GB/s) talking about 6900&6800...so don't worry there are no issues there....but yeah the current prices and availability are just insane + after that AMD cancel their support for those cards and the way they handle that now draws me towards Nvidia or maybe new Intel GPU's....



DG 2 is 1050 performance which the R9 290 competes with RX580s...


----------



## Zyll Goliat (Jun 28, 2021)

eidairaman1 said:


> DG 2 is 1050 performance which the R9 290 competes with RX580s...


We will see...there are some talks that strongest Intel GPU should be almost on par with the 3070.....


----------



## TheinsanegamerN (Jun 29, 2021)

About time IMO. Outside of the 8GB290x/390x, all these cards are 4GB or less, which isnt enough for even 1080p high in newer games. Even then the 390x struggles to maintain 60 FPS average at 1080p. The 5500xt thrashes every card in this list and was $150. 

There's no real reason to continue optimizing for a series of cards utterly unable to run modern games in the best case. And some of us warned that this would happen, that once rDNA was strong enough AMD would dump all of GCN, and that the 4GB framebuffer would cripple the fury.


----------



## Valantar (Jun 29, 2021)

TheinsanegamerN said:


> About time IMO. Outside of the 8GB290x/390x, all these cards are 4GB or less, which isnt enough for even 1080p high in newer games. Even then the 390x struggles to maintain 60 FPS average at 1080p. The 5500xt thrashes every card in this list and was $150.
> 
> There's no real reason to continue optimizing for a series of cards utterly unable to run modern games in the best case. And some of us warned that this would happen, that once rDNA was strong enough AMD would dump all of GCN, and that the 4GB framebuffer would cripple the fury.


It's hasn't though - at the quality settings needed to maintain decent performance for GPUs of this level of compute performance, you're not coming anywhere near 4GB at 1080p. The VRAM is fine even for 1440p at the settings it can handle - it's just that even at those settings it won't be delivering much in terms of framerate.


AsRock said:


> 8 tops, 290 was 2013 and 390 was 2015. Last time they did it they removed all the drivers so you could not even try a newer version unless you installed the old drivers


... since when was the Rx 2xx series the first generation of GCN? HD 79xx launched in late 2011/early 2012.

Also, of course drivers for older cards won't be included in newer driver packages. What else would discontinued mean? Besides, when you go to download drivers and select one of those GPUs, you won't be shown the newest, incompatible driver, but the latest compatible driver. It's not like they're purging older compatible drivers from their downloads list.


Zyll Goliath said:


> 10 years will be ideal...8 years it's still Ok I guess....but now here we come to the 5 years.....what's next 3,2,1...but hey don't you worrie they will make sure to let you know 24h prior they decide to cancel support for their products.....that's really top notch service....


Wait, when did 6 become 5? Sounds like you're letting your worries get the best of you here. There no reason to suspect this is a slippery slope type of situation currently.


----------



## AsRock (Jun 30, 2021)

Valantar said:


> It's hasn't though - at the quality settings needed to maintain decent performance for GPUs of this level of compute performance, you're not coming anywhere near 4GB at 1080p. The VRAM is fine even for 1440p at the settings it can handle - it's just that even at those settings it won't be delivering much in terms of framerate.
> 
> ... since when was the Rx 2xx series the first generation of GCN? HD 79xx launched in late 2011/early 2012.
> 
> ...



My bad if i said it was but still think it's too early.


4GB is barely ok for 1080P in some game,  RDR2 can push it  3900MB just on start up of a new game never mind after a few minutes it will be over 4GB and before you know it's going over 5GB.

Just started a new game.


----------



## Valantar (Jun 30, 2021)

AsRock said:


> 4GB is barely ok for 1080P in some game, RDR2 can push it 3900MB just on start up of a new game never mind after a few minutes it will be over 4GB and before you know it's going over 5GB.


At which settings level? Also, remember that allocated VRAM is not the same as required/in active use VRAM. Most games stream in assets long before they might be needed if there is spare VRAM, most of these are never used and are just ejected after a while. VRAM use for the same settings can vary quite a bit across different GPUs.


----------



## The red spirit (Jun 30, 2021)

TheinsanegamerN said:


> About time IMO. Outside of the 8GB290x/390x, all these cards are 4GB or less, which isnt enough for even 1080p high in newer games. Even then the 390x struggles to maintain 60 FPS average at 1080p. The 5500xt thrashes every card in this list and was $150.


You can tell RTX 3000 series owner, from them talking dump like that.


----------



## nguyen (Jun 30, 2021)

The red spirit said:


> You can tell RTX 3000 series owner, from them talking dump like that.



Nvidia has been using lossless memory compressions to reduce VRAM size and bandwidth requirements for ages. You can check how 5500XT 4GB got whooped by 1650 Super 4GB in some games.








Clearly 4GB VRAM is not enough for AMD at 1080p Ultra, however 4GB VRAM is enough for Nvidia at 1080p Ultra.


----------



## Hyderz (Jun 30, 2021)

i guess amd is trying to leave behind that old gcn and bulldozer days, full speed ahead for new architecture.


----------



## The red spirit (Jun 30, 2021)

nguyen said:


> Nvidia has been using lossless memory compressions to reduce VRAM size and bandwidth requirements for ages. You can check how 5500XT 4GB got whooped by 1650 Super 4GB in some games.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Depends on settings, perhaps nVidia has a better compression (AMD had it since like 2003, so they aren't exactly new in compression game), but also depends on game settings. Maybe both nV and AMD lack vRAM if some knob cranked textures to Ultra. That doesn't change the fact that 4GB vRAM is generally not a problem. And I found that review:








						ASUS Radeon RX 5500 XT STRIX 8 GB Review
					

The ASUS RX 5500 XT STRIX OC is their most premium entry-level Navi design. The large triple-slot, dual-fan cooler achieves outstanding temperatures and is whisper quiet at the same time. Fan stop is included too, and the VRM design is overbuilt, which could explain the good OC results we're seeing.




					www.techpowerup.com
				




About game settings:
"All games are set to their highest quality setting unless indicated otherwise."

So yeah, that sets textures to Ultra and here we are talking about 4GB being enough or not for a budget card. It certainly is enough if you set your textures to medium. To be honest, I'm not even sure what the point of testing budget cards at Ultra settings, that pretty much makes that review pointless.


----------



## ratirt (Jun 30, 2021)

nguyen said:


> Nvidia has been using lossless memory compressions to reduce VRAM size and bandwidth requirements for ages. You can check how 5500XT 4GB got whooped by 1650 Super 4GB in some games.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Nobody cares about nv in this thread and how great it is. That's not the conversation here. 
Besides the difference in Vram usage between the two cards is negligible in games and it is hard to say 5500xt got whupped.



Hyderz said:


> i guess amd is trying to leave behind that old gcn and bulldozer days, full speed ahead for new architecture.


The cards will still work fine and it is not said the FSR wont work with them. It is not being supported by the driver.  
The difference is huge in these two phrases, not supported and wont work.


The red spirit said:


> Depends on settings, perhaps nVidia has a better compression (AMD had it since like 2003, so they aren't exactly new in compression game), but also depends on game settings. Maybe both nV and AMD lack vRAM if some knob cranked textures to Ultra. That doesn't change the fact that 4GB vRAM is generally not a problem. And I found that review:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


This NV crap is really annoying. You are correct. The difference between the Vram usage is blown out of proportion. 








A link to a comparison of the two mentioned cards side by side. There is basically no difference in vram usage and if there is, it's not even worth mentioning. 
I love those NV trolls. They are always there to throw how great NV is. Isn't that annoying and tiresome to keep reading something not even related to the thread?


----------



## nguyen (Jun 30, 2021)

The red spirit said:


> Depends on settings, perhaps nVidia has a better compression (AMD had it since like 2003, so they aren't exactly new in compression game), but also depends on game settings. Maybe both nV and AMD lack vRAM if some knob cranked textures to Ultra. That doesn't change the fact that 4GB vRAM is generally not a problem. And I found that review:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Reviewers using arbitrary settings for testing is not new, like how some other reviewers (not TPU) like to test games with DX12 API even when they know DX11 runs better (BF5, Borderlands 3).

Things is R9 290 and Fury are still perfect for free online games like Valorant, Apex Legends, Fortnite, etc...and cutting their support line is just AMD shitting on customers LMAO. But I know some people will defend AMD's practice at all cost.


----------



## The red spirit (Jun 30, 2021)

nguyen said:


> Reviewers using arbitrary settings for testing is not new, like how some other reviewers (not TPU) like to test games with DX12 API even when they know DX11 runs better (BF5, Borderlands 3).
> 
> Things is R9 290 and Fury are still perfect for free online games like Valorant, Apex Legends, Fortnite, etc...and cutting their support line is just AMD shitting on customers LMAO. But I know some people will defend AMD's practice at all cost.


I'm pretty sure that Fury X or Fury Nano are still okay even for AAA at 1080p. Here are the results:









Fury X still does well, very well. It can run almost anything at 1080p Ultra and if it can't, then it surely can run any thing at 1080p medium-high. It's still a good card.


But for real, using Ultra settings in budget card review is stupid. It would be much better if medium or high presets were used for review, but Ultra is just no. And considering that "no results were recycled", that's just odd to use Ultra.


----------



## Vya Domus (Jun 30, 2021)

ratirt said:


> A link to a comparison of the two mentioned cards side by side. There is basically no difference in vram usage and if there is, it's not even worth mentioning.


That's because people don't know what the hell they're talking about, not one damn clue, zero knowledge or understating on the subject.

The compression is used to reduce bandwidth consumption NOT to store actual game data compressed in memory. The act of compressing/decompressing memory every time you need to access it would catastrophically destroy performance.


----------



## nguyen (Jun 30, 2021)

Vya Domus said:


> That's because people don't know what the hell they're talking about, not one damn clue, zero knowledge or understating on the subject.
> 
> The compression is used to reduce bandwidth consumption NOT to store actual game data compressed in memory. The act of compressing/decompressing memory every time you need to access it would catastrophically destroy performance.



Funny how some people who can't differentiate between 1080p Ultra vs 1080p High talk about how knowledgeable they are , and also allocated VRAM is not how much VRAM the GPU is using.

More information here:








						Nvidia GeForce GTX 1080 Founders Edition (16nm Pascal)
					

Raising the bar for PC gaming.




					hexus.net
				




Quote from the article:


> All modern GPUs use some form of lossless compression to minimise the amount of data written out to memory, saving power and keeping performance high.



The act of compressing/decompressing will increase the effective bandwidth by reducing the footprint, imagine compressing a game from 200GB to 100GB will increase the effective bandwidth 2x when you have the same physical bandwidth, that's also how PS5's new SSD compression/decompression work. Of course there is some performance compromise with compression/decompression on the GPU but the advantage far outweight the disadvantage.
Fun fact Steam also compress/decompress game files on the fly, that's why you see the download bandwidth exceed connection speed.


----------



## Zyll Goliat (Jun 30, 2021)

Valantar said:


> Wait, when did 6 become 5? Sounds like you're letting your worries get the best of you here. There no reason to suspect this is a slippery slope type of situation currently.


Well...Some of the cards are released in July 2015(Fury) some in August(R9 Nano) so that's not 6 year yet...also you have Radeon Pro Duo that was released in April 2016 or R7 350(Cape Verde XTL) that was released in February 2016...that's the reason why I always like to said 5+ years.....



Valantar said:


> At which settings level? Also, remember that allocated VRAM is not the same as required/in active use VRAM. Most games stream in assets long before they might be needed if there is spare VRAM, most of these are never used and are just ejected after a while. VRAM use for the same settings can vary quite a bit across different GPUs.


Yep...I agree with this....especially for cards like fury that have wide memory bus and great memory bandwidth I said that 4gb it's still enough for majority of new games to play on high settings.....


----------



## Vya Domus (Jun 30, 2021)

nguyen said:


> Funny how some people who can't differentiate between 1080p Ultra vs 1080p High talk about how knowledgeable they are , and also allocated VRAM is not how much VRAM the GPU is using.


Literally no idea what you are talking about, also allocated/used VRAM has nothing to do with this.



nguyen said:


> Quote from the article:



How about you read some actual documentation on this, all that these GPUs do is read data from memory, compress it, and store it in various levels of on-chip memory for repeated access. This increases effective bandwidth because GPUs recurrently need to access the same data from frame to frame. That's also why RDNA2 GPU work so well with so little VRAM bandwidth due to the huge caches, more cache more compressed data can be kept. Go ahead and try and find any information for this in the context of reducing memory storage consumption, you wont because that's not what this is used for, this is only relevant to effective bandwidth.







			https://repository.library.northeastern.edu/files/neu:m044c501s/fulltext.pdf
		




nguyen said:


> The act of compressing/decompressing will increase the effective bandwidth by reducing the footprint, imagine compressing a game from 200GB to 100GB will increase the effective bandwidth 2x when you have the same physical bandwidth, that's also how PS5's new SSD compression/decompression work. Of course there is some performance compromise with compression/decompression on the GPU but the advantage far outweight the disadvantage.
> Fun fact Steam also compress/decompress game files on the fly, that's why you see the download bandwidth exceed connection speed.


Not only that this has nothing to do with anything it doesn't even work remotely the same, game data on the disk is already compressed in that case and it isn't done in order to increase bandwidth it's done simply to reduce storage requirements. Basically you got this completely backwards because like I said, you don't know what you are talking about, GPUs don't take a performance hit doing this, this is meant to increase performance, that's the point.

Conclusion, the goal of compression in GPUs is to increase performance not to decrease VRAM consumption. If that wasn't the case you would just store the data compressed from the get go, can you use your brain for a moment ?


----------



## nguyen (Jun 30, 2021)

Zyll Goliath said:


> Well...Some of the cards are released in July 2015(Fury) some in August(R9 Nano) so that's not 6 year yet...also you have Radeon Pro Duo that was released in April 2016 or R7 350(Cape Verde XTL) that was released in February 2016...that's the reason why I always like to said 5+ years.....



Let just hope AMD won't discontinue RX400 support next year   (2016 launch)


----------



## Zyll Goliat (Jun 30, 2021)

nguyen said:


> Let just hope AMD won't discontinue RX400 support next year   (2016 launch)


Why not?I see some people here claim that 5-6 year of support is long enough and that is better for AMD to not waste their time&energy on products that are that "old"....ohh yeah and some of them said also it's not such a big deal you can still download legacy support so why not maybe they can cancel Vega also.....


----------



## nguyen (Jun 30, 2021)

Zyll Goliath said:


> Why not?I see some people here claim that 5-6 year of support is long enough and that is better for AMD to not waste their time&energy on products that are that "old"....ohh yeah as some of them said also it's not such a big deal you can still download legacy support so why not maybe they can cancel Vega also it's waste of their precious time......



AMD was seriously thinking about retiring RX400 when they said RX400 won't support FSR initially, then they backpedal quickly.


----------



## Vya Domus (Jun 30, 2021)

Zyll Goliath said:


> I see some people here claim that 5-6 year of support is long enough


It doesn't even matter what we claim, if you buy a new product technically you should only expect support for the time the product is within warranty, that's it. Eventually you'll have to understand that there is no obligation for AMD to support a GPU a million years past that.

5-6 years is totally reasonable, most users would have moved on by that point to something else. The question is can you make the case that it isn't enough ?


----------



## Zyll Goliat (Jun 30, 2021)

Vya Domus said:


> It doesn't even matter what we claim, if you buy a new product technically you should only expect support for the time the product is within warranty, that's it. Eventually you'll have to understand that there is no obligation for AMD to support a GPU a million years past that.
> 
> 5-6 years is totally reasonable, most users would have moved on by that point to something else, the question is can you make the case that it isn't ?


Right....I can only WISH that there is some obligation when it comes to this...some other co. cancelling their support after 8-9 years but you are correct there is no written obligation from AMD tho' neither there is obligation from me or any other unhappy customers that believe that AMD cancel their support prematurely....So I guess that I am still free to express my opinion and also FREE to stop supporting company that just stops supporting GPU's that me and other's still actively using.....

P.S.BTW I see that you are using GTX 1080 well that card is released  in may 2016...5-6 years is totally reasonable you said then maybe you can write a letter to Nvidia support team and ask them to stop their driver support for Pascal&Maxwell I mean why do they waste their time with such an "old"products?


----------



## ratirt (Jun 30, 2021)

Zyll Goliath said:


> Right....I can only WISH that there is some obligation when it comes to this...some other co. cancelling their support after 8-9 years but you are correct there is no written obligation from AMD tho' neither there is obligation from me or any other unhappy customers that believe that AMD cancel their support prematurely....So I guess that I am still free to express my opinion and also stop supporting company that just stops supporting GPU's that me and other's still actively using.....


If you look at this from a different perspective, those that have waited 8-9 years missed out and maybe should have ended the support earlier and the move, not to end, has cost them a lot of resources and time for a dead product already which they are not getting back. They should have ended the support 3-4 years earlier and move all the resources to a newly released products. Prematurely? Why you keep using adjectives which most people don't agree with, suggesting AMD has done something wrong? 6 years of support is plenty.
I'm sorry, if I recall, people were throwing insults on AMD's drivers support for newly released products where the drivers sucked. Do you remember all of this feud that followed, when users started reporting problems with the drivers for 5000 series cards? (I hardly had any problems but aside that) Maybe if AMD dropped the 200 and 300 series cards earlier (they didn't and that is a fair thing to do by all means), less problems would have occurred with the new cards and driver support.
There are new graphics cards coming out and probably (rumors say) 2 chiplets to increase performance and they should still support old 200 300 series cards? This move is going to require all they've got to make it work and give support those new cards and users deserve. Still, keeping previous gen cards support up and running. So think what you are saying here and you guys should look at this from a different perspective not just what's best for you. Sad to say but customers buying new products deserves most of the attention and support because that is what drives company profits today. In the business perspective, that's the only way to go in order for the company to survive.


----------



## Valantar (Jun 30, 2021)

nguyen said:


> Things is R9 290 and Fury are still perfect for free online games like Valorant, Apex Legends, Fortnite, etc...and cutting their support line is just AMD shitting on customers LMAO. But I know some people will defend AMD's practice at all cost.


... But does this discontinuation of support affect that in any way whatsoever? No, not at all. So your argument collapses in on itself, as ther are no stakes involved. If it worked while it was supported (which essentially everything did), then it works exactly the same after. And if a game update breaks it, that is on the game developer to fix, not AMD (unless the bug in question turns out to be a previously unknown major bug, in which case an out-of-band patch is likely even for unsupported cards).


Zyll Goliath said:


> Why not?I see some people here claim that 5-6 year of support is long enough and that is better for AMD to not waste their time&energy on products that are that "old"....ohh yeah and some of them said also it's not such a big deal you can still download legacy support so why not maybe they can cancel Vega also.....


You've still yet to present any viable argument or data suggesting that further driver support would improve the usefulness of these GPUs. Performance is unchanged, and there are no reported major bugs in the past year. What benefits are you losing?


Zyll Goliath said:


> Well...Some of the cards are released in July 2015(Fury) some in August(R9 Nano) so that's not 6 year yet...also you have Radeon Pro Duo that was released in April 2016 or R7 350(Cape Verde XTL) that was released in February 2016...that's the reason why I always like to said 5+ years.....


The Pro Duo is not a consumer card, and doesn't use consumer drivers at all, nor follow consumer support cycles. It is as such entirely irrelevant to this discussion.

And as for your incredibly pedantic and nit-picky "it's not 6 years, it's only 5 and 11 months!".... seriously?

As for the R7 350, given that it likely would struggle to perform playably in modern titles at even 720p, how would further driver support help it?


Zyll Goliath said:


> Right....I can only WISH that there is some obligation when it comes to this...some other co. cancelling their support after 8-9 years but you are correct there is no written obligation from AMD tho' neither there is obligation from me or any other unhappy customers that believe that AMD cancel their support prematurely....So I guess that I am still free to express my opinion and also FREE to stop supporting company that just stops supporting GPU's that me and other's still actively using.....
> 
> P.S.BTW I see that you are using GTX 1080 well that card is released  in may 2016...5-6 years is totally reasonable you said then maybe you can write a letter to Nvidia support team and ask them to stop their driver support for Pascal&Maxwell I mean why do they waste their time with such an "old"products?


You're obviously free to express whatever opinions you might have, but you aren't shielded from being asked to argue for or provide supporting data for those opinions. So far you've not done either in any significant or convincing manner, all the while ignoring and refusing to engage with data contradicting the supposed problems underpinning your argument.

I'm still waiting to see you being anything more to the table than "there might be bugs at some point!", as that is so weak as to not be an argument at all.



People, please: "these GPUs are still being used" is NOT an argument for them benefitting noticeably from future driver updates - such benefits are contingent on either bug fixes being needed (which hasn't been the case for a while according to driver changelogs) or performance being boosted by game optimization (which isn't going to matter on GPUs this weak). So, if either of these are the crux of your argument, please take a step back and reconsider whether the effort you are arguing for would actually make any kind of noticeable difference at all, or whether you are arguing for a placebo measure with no real impact just to feel better. I absolutely understand the latter feeling, but it is irrational in a way that twists arguments for consumer-friendliness and long term support into a caricature that is potentially damaging to that cause.


----------



## Zyll Goliat (Jun 30, 2021)

ratirt said:


> If you look at this from a different perspective, those that have waited 8-9 years missed out and maybe should have ended the support earlier and the move, not to end, has cost them a lot of resources and time for a dead product already which they are not getting back. They should have ended the support 3-4 years earlier and move all the resources to a newly released products. Prematurely? Why you keep using adjectives which most people don't agree with, suggesting AMD has done something wrong? 6 years of support is plenty.
> I'm sorry, if I recall, people were throwing insults on AMD's drivers support for newly released products where the drivers sucked. Do you remember all of this feud that followed, when users started reporting problems with the drivers for 5000 series cards? (I hardly had any problems but aside that) Maybe if AMD dropped the 200 and 300 series cards earlier (they didn't and that is a fair thing to do by all means), less problems would have occurred with the new cards and driver support.
> There are new graphics cards coming out and probably (rumors say) 2 chiplets to increase performance and they should still support old 200 300 series cards? This move is going to require all they've got to make it work and give support those new cards and users deserve. Still, keeping previous gen cards support up and running. So think what you are saying here and you guys should look at this from a different perspective not just what's best for you. said to say but customers buying new products deserves most of the attention and support because that is what drives company profits today. In the business perspective, that's the only way to go in order for the company to survive.


Ohh I am srry my Lord(6900XT) that I didn't recognized you immediately but you must understand that I am just a simple peasant who try to mind his own business with this old and useless card.....Right...Right your Majesty they should only support the cards that you currently own and they should stop wasting their time on old products and on dirty peasants like myself


----------



## nguyen (Jun 30, 2021)

Valantar said:


> ... But does this discontinuation of support affect that in any way whatsoever? No, not at all. So your argument collapses in on itself, as ther are no stakes involved. If it worked while it was supported (which essentially everything did), then it works exactly the same after. And if a game update breaks it, that is on the game developer to fix, not AMD (unless the bug in question turns out to be a previously unknown major bug, in which case an out-of-band patch is likely even for unsupported cards).



Hm, you don't seem to understand that free new online games are coming out every year right? I mentioned those games as examples, not case study.
So far 70% of votes go to "AMD should continue to support those GPU", so you are making yourself look bad by defending bad practices.


----------



## Valantar (Jun 30, 2021)

nguyen said:


> Hm, you don't seem to understand that new online games are coming out every year right? I mentioned those games as examples, not case study.
> So far 70% of votes go to "AMD should continue to support those GPU", so you are making yourself look bad by defending bad practices.


But is there any reason to suspect major bugs that the developers of those games won't be able to fix for these GPUs? Remember, GCN is the most widely distributed GPU architecture in the world, across both previous gen consoles as well as PCs. It is extremely well known and well supported.

As for whether I'm "making myself look bad"... So? I've been plenty clear throughout this thread on my view of this: IMO, 6 years is fine. Not good, but not bad either. Fine. Acceptable. And that's it. Ending support at this point? Meh. And remember, I'm currently using a Fury X. I'm more invested into these GPUs than 99% of the people voting on this poll.


----------



## nguyen (Jun 30, 2021)

Valantar said:


> But is there any reason to suspect major bugs that the developers of those games won't be able to fix for these GPUs? Remember, GCN is the most widely distributed GPU architecture in the world, across both previous gen consoles as well as PCs. It is extremely well known and well supported.
> 
> As for whether I'm "making myself look bad"... So? I've been plenty clear throughout this thread on my view of this: IMO, 6 years is fine. Not good, but not bad either. Fine. Acceptable. And that's it. Ending support at this point? Meh. And remember, I'm currently using a Fury X. I'm more invested into these GPUs than 99% of the people voting on this poll.



And I have a R9 290 in a spare rig and currently my nephew is using that to play free games, so yeah, tough call.
It's funny how AMD can manage to support old GPU when they were barely surviving, but now when they are swimming in cash, suddenly they need all the efforts to maintain competitive edge


----------



## ratirt (Jun 30, 2021)

Zyll Goliath said:


> Ohh I am srry my Lord that I didn't recognized you immediately but you must understand that I am just a simple peasant who try to mind his own business with this old and useless card.....Right...Right your Majesty they should only support the cards that you currently own and they should stop wasting their time on old products and on dirty peasants like myself


Stop being condescending. The card is not being useless and it still works fine with the drivers. Ain't that right? Just because you want to have a 10 years of support and refuse to look at this from a different perspective (company's perspective) doesn't mean all companies should make it happen because one or two other companies are doing it. You are simply being selfish and you use this: AMD has betrayed me for not supporting drivers for a 6 year old card is just looking for an excuse to gloat about this.
Yes they should stop wasting time and resources on cards they are not selling and if the warranty for the card has expired. If they do support it further, that's great but it will not go forever. You had 5 years of warranty if I recall correctly on that Fury or whatever card you have. You got one additional year with support. It's more than enough. I can bet you would whine if after 8 years the support was over, You would probably give another spiel about why so early and how you have been treated with no respect and that 10 years is better. Come one man.


----------



## Zyll Goliat (Jun 30, 2021)

Valantar said:


> But is there any reason to suspect major bugs that the developers of those games won't be able to fix for these GPUs? Remember, GCN is the most widely distributed GPU architecture in the world, across both previous gen consoles as well as PCs. It is extremely well known and well supported.
> 
> As for whether I'm "making myself look bad"... So? I've been plenty clear throughout this thread on my view of this: IMO, 6 years is fine. Not good, but not bad either. Fine. Acceptable. And that's it. Ending support at this point? Meh. And remember, I'm currently using a Fury X. I'm more invested into these GPUs than 99% of the people voting on this poll.


Major or minor the bugs will happened sooner or later also there are other driver issues that could be caused considering that also we have windows 11 now.....I mean that is nothing new you can grab some old GPU now that don't have driver support anymore for example and play some new games perfectly fine but then some other games will have some weird texture popping or it will just crash upon you start them....


----------



## Mussels (Jun 30, 2021)

And really, when these drivers were being supported... were they really getting any updates? Or was their driver just packaged along with newer drivers for newer hardware, with zero actual changes?
Bugs get *added* to drivers as often as they're removed, so why the heck not stay with a static driver, that wont introduce new ones?

W1zz did a thorough, insanely time consuming review of drivers once to test the "fine wine" theory and found less than 1% difference in his benchmark suite over a years?  (might have been longer) worth of updates

you're not missing anything. Nothings being removed. Windows 7 drivers install fine on windows 11 (personally tested this) so... these cards are good to go until the day they die, even in newer OS's.


----------



## Valantar (Jun 30, 2021)

nguyen said:


> And I have a R9 290 in a spare rig and currently my nephew is using that to play free games, so yeah, tough call.
> It's funny how AMD can manage to support old GPU when they were barely surviving, but now when they are swimming in cash, suddenly they need all the efforts to maintain competitive edge


Did they, though? How long was driver support for their VLIW architectures continued? From what I can remember it was cut very soon after I bought my Fury X and sold the 6950 I had before it. That was of course a last-gen VLIW card, but I bought it in 2011 and lost driver support in 2015, so...

(Looking now, there seems to be a Radeon Software Crimson beta from January 2016 for the 6950. Still a shorter support period than my Fury X though.)


Zyll Goliath said:


> Major or minor the bugs will happened also there are other driver issues that could be caused considering that also we have windows 11 now.....I mean that is nothing new you can grab some old GPU now that don't have driver support anymore for example and play some new games perfectly fine but then some other games will have some weird texture popping or it will just crash upon you start them....


Yes, but both major and minor bugs are first and foremost the responsibility of the software vendor to fix, unless they are specifically a driver or firmware bug. Nothing changes in this regard. The vast majority of bugs in new games specific to a certain type of hardware is fixed by the developer, not the hardware vendor.

As for the "other driver issues" ... how many times do I have to ask you to please present specific arguments and data rather than "oh noes something might break at some point" FUD? Either substantiate your claims or stop making them.

As for W11... so? W10 drivers will work as long as the GPUs support required features such as WDDM 3.0. And if not, the point is moot.


----------



## Zyll Goliat (Jun 30, 2021)

Mussels said:


> And really, when these drivers were being supported... were they really getting any updates? Or was their driver just packaged along with newer drivers for newer hardware, with zero actual changes?
> Bugs get *added* to drivers as often as they're removed, so why the heck not stay with a static driver, that wont introduce new ones?
> 
> W1zz did a thorough, insanely time consuming review of drivers once to test the "fine wine" theory and found less than 1% difference in his benchmark suite over a years?  (might have been longer) worth of updates
> ...


I really don't get you...Did anyone mention in here that GPU going to loose their performance because AMD dropped support ?I mean yeah sure sometimes GPU performance can improve for few % here and there with the different drivers but that was never the issue here....


----------



## Valantar (Jun 30, 2021)

Zyll Goliath said:


> I really don't get you...Did anyone mention in here that GPU going to loose their performance because AMD dropped support ?I mean yeah sure sometimes GPU performance can improve for few % here and there with the different drivers but that was never the issue here....


And 'round and' round we go. Here's the thing: performance is the same. The vast majority of bugs can and will be fixed by developers, especially as this architecture is extremely well known, supported and documented for literally every game engine not made by Nintendo. So where, exactly, is the problem in ending driver support? As @Mussels said, continued "support" would likely just mean re-packaging older drivers alongside the newer ones for newer cards, with no changes. That's a useless placebo measure. So, to sum up, there's no performance or functionality lost, there is none to be gained, bugs can be - and typically are - fixed by developers, and not discontinuing support would most likely mean "support" in name only (like with Kepler GPUs for the last couple of years). What is there to gain from this?


----------



## Mussels (Jun 30, 2021)

Yeah, this is circular.

You're just mad without knowing why you're mad, and arguing every single point. You've lost nothing. The cards still work. The driver downloads still exist. The cards work in upcoming Operating Systems like W11 just fine.

So what are you missing? what are you mad about?

It's not OS support. It's not stability. It's not game performance... you've denied its any of those.


----------



## Zyll Goliat (Jun 30, 2021)

Valantar said:


> Yes, but both major and minor bugs are first and foremost the responsibility of the software vendor to fix, unless they are specifically a driver or firmware bug. Nothing changes in this regard. The vast majority of bugs in new games specific to a certain type of hardware is fixed by the developer, not the hardware vendor.
> 
> As for the "other driver issues" ... how many times do I have to ask you to please present specific arguments and data rather than "oh noes something might break at some point" FUD? Either substantiate your claims or stop making them.
> 
> As for W11... so? W10 drivers will work as long as the GPUs support required features such as WDDM 3.0. And if not, the point is moot.


Seems like that you don't get how the certain thing works.....Developers or as you called them "Software vendors" are always entangled with AMD&Nvidia...and yeah sure they always trying first to fix things on their side but if they can't  or if they realized that problem is caused by some driver issue then they will ask for help from AMD&Nvida supports team.....


----------



## nguyen (Jun 30, 2021)

Valantar said:


> And 'round and' round we go. Here's the thing: performance is the same. The vast majority of bugs can and will be fixed by developers, especially as this architecture is extremely well known, supported and documented for literally every game engine not made by Nintendo. So where, exactly, is the problem in ending driver support? As @Mussels said, continued "support" would likely just mean re-packaging older drivers alongside the newer ones for newer cards, with no changes. That's a useless placebo measure. So, to sum up, there's no performance or functionality lost, there is none to be gained, bugs can be - and typically are - fixed by developers, and not discontinuing support would most likely mean "support" in name only (like with Kepler GPUs for the last couple of years). What is there to gain from this?



The answers you are looking for is right in the driver release note for new Drivers that don't support "obsolete hardwares"


> Added Vulkan Support
> 
> 
> VK_EXT_custom_border_color
> ...





> Radeon FreeSync may intermittently become locked while on desktop after performing task switching between extended and primary displays upon closing a game, causing poor performance or stuttering.
> Anno 1800 may crash upon launching this game when running DirectX 12.


----------



## Zyll Goliat (Jun 30, 2021)

Mussels said:


> Yeah, this is circular.
> 
> You're just mad without knowing why you're mad, and arguing every single point. You've lost nothing. The cards still work. The driver downloads still exist. The cards work in upcoming Operating Systems like W11 just fine.
> 
> ...


That's really cool when the site Moderator calls you MAD when he lacks the valid argument...In that case maybe you should stop arguing with the madman and close this thread entirely c'mon let's choke the rest of the resistance that left in here....as I said before this topic ain't good for you for me and certainly not good for AMD........


----------



## Valantar (Jun 30, 2021)

nguyen said:


> The answers you are looking for is right in the driver release note for new Drivers that don't support "obsolete hardwares"


So... They added support for some vulkan extensions, and there are some known bugs that don't specify the cards they apply to? Yeah, sorry, that's not specific enough. Unspecified bugs are most likely found in the most used architectures, which would be RX 4xx and 5xx at this point. Those Vulkan extensions... gauging the impact of that is impossible, but what is to say developers couldn't build a simple workaround for cards that don't support them? They certainly don't look very important. The first bug mentioned specifically mentions the RX 6000-series, so it likely isn't relevant for these GPUs (the same bug across vastly different architectures is unlikely). So again, I don't really see the issue. 


Zyll Goliath said:


> That's really cool when the site Moderator calls you MAD when he lacks the valid argument...In that case maybe you should stop arguing with the madman and close this thread entirely c'mon let's choke the rest of the resistance that left in here....as I said before this topic ain't good for you for me and certainly not good for AMD........


Okay, there might be a language barrier in play here, but "mad" in this context is clearly meant as "angry". "Madman" is a slur for mental illness, and has no relation to mad in the meaning of angry. And you've frequently admitted to being angry about this, so... what's the problem?


----------



## Zyll Goliat (Jun 30, 2021)

Valantar said:


> Okay, there might be a language barrier in play here, but "mad" in this context is clearly meant as "angry". "Madman" is a slur for mental illness, and has no relation to mad in the meaning of angry. And you've frequently admitted to being angry about this, so... what's the problem?


Ohh sure correct the language barrier was in play there then you should don't mind if I said to you the same You're just mad without knowing why you're mad, and arguing every single point.....


----------



## Valantar (Jun 30, 2021)

Zyll Goliath said:


> Seems like that you don't get how the certain thing works.....Developers or as you called them "Software vendors" are always entangled with AMD&Nvidia...and yeah sure they always trying first to fix things on their side but if they can't  or if they realized that problem is caused by some driver issue then they will ask for help from AMD&Nvida supports team.....


And what do AMD and Nvidia do in these cases? Provide documentation and support. There is a literal decade of support for these GPUs available. Ther is no other architecture that any developer is likely to have worked more with. If they can't find the cause of a bug and fix it now, it's highly unlikely AMD would be able to either.

Software bugs are fixed through driver updates only in the rare cases where the bug is uniquely attributable to driver issues rathe than game code issues (and even in these cases game code workarounds are typically possible). So ending driver support for the most familiar and well documented gpu architecture out there? One that hasn't had an explicitly identified driver fix in at least nine months? Doesn't change much.


----------



## Zyll Goliat (Jun 30, 2021)

Valantar said:


> And what do AMD and Nvidia do in these cases? Provide documentation and support. There is a literal decade of support for these GPUs available. Ther is no other architecture that any developer is likely to have worked more with. If they can't find the cause of a bug and fix it now, it's highly unlikely AMD would be able to either.
> 
> Software bugs are fixed through driver updates only in the rare cases where the bug is uniquely attributable to driver issues rathe than game code issues (and even in these cases game code workarounds are typically possible). So ending driver support for the most familiar and well documented gpu architecture out there? One that hasn't had an explicitly identified driver fix in at least nine months? Doesn't change much.


You're just mad without knowing why you're mad, and arguing every single point.....


----------



## Vya Domus (Jun 30, 2021)

Zyll Goliath said:


> P.S.BTW I see that you are using GTX 1080 well that card is released  in may 2016...5-6 years is totally reasonable you said then maybe you can write a letter to Nvidia support team and ask them to stop their driver support for Pascal&Maxwell I mean why do they waste their time with such an "old"products?



You know damn well this ridiculous and completely irrelevant but nice try. I'm pretty sure by now you're here just to troll.



nguyen said:


> It's funny how AMD can manage to support old GPU when they were barely surviving, but now when they are swimming in cash



What's funny is how apparently AMD is now "swimming in cash". Really ? Careful there "swimming in cash" implies success and I am pretty sure that if this was about market share and what not you'd be spamming this thread with Steam surveys and how nobody is buying their products.


----------



## Zyll Goliat (Jun 30, 2021)

Vya Domus said:


> You know damn well this ridiculous and completely irrelevant but nice try. I'm pretty sure by now you're here just to troll.


How come is Irrelevant??Is it because it's yours GPU or is it because it's Nvidia?


----------



## Valantar (Jun 30, 2021)

Zyll Goliath said:


> Ohh sure correct then here you go You're just mad without knowing why you're mad, and arguing every single point.....


?

I'm not mad at all, nor have I ever been so (nor does it seem like Mussels is), I'm just a tad annoyed that people here are blowing a minor communication issue way out of proportion. And unlike you I've consistently and in detail argued and provided data to support my opinion. You have repeated "but there might be bugs!" in a hundred different ways, while refusing to engage with the data and arguments raised against you. That's why we keep going in circles.

As I said above: please take a step back, take a breath, and consider what you are arguing for and why. In detail. Several of us have been trying to do so, but engaging you seems to only increase your irritation and prevent you from seeing how repetitive and vague you are being. So, please, take a break?



Zyll Goliath said:


> How come is Irrelevant??Is it because it's yours GPU or is it because it's Nvidia?


Because it's a ridiculous whataboutist parody of an argument. You keep arguing (I'm using that term very loosely here) in bad faith and refusing to actually engage in any semblance of intellectually honest debate, which is why you're not getting anywhere.


----------



## Zyll Goliat (Jun 30, 2021)

Valantar said:


> ?
> 
> I'm not mad at all, nor have I ever been so (nor does it seem like Mussels is), I'm just a tad annoyed that people here are blowing a minor communication issue way out of proportion. And unlike you I've consistently and in detail argued and provided data to support my opinion. You have repeated "but there might be bugs!" in a hundred different ways, while refusing to engage with the data and arguments raised against you. That's why we keep going in circles.
> 
> As I said above: please take a step back, take a breath, and consider what you are arguing for and why. In detail. Several of us have been trying to do so, but engaging you seems to only increase your irritation and prevent you from seeing how repetitive and vague you are being. So, please, take a break?


Why don't you  take a step back, take a breath, and consider what you are arguing for and why.....Honestly I don't know where are you getting all of this...as soon as things do not go in yours direction seems like you become mad and arguing every single point.....
Can you see the poll results on the top?Did you read other reddit threads about this?Did you watch videos and opinions that certain youtubers have about this(Tech Yes City or even Hardware unboxed)?


----------



## Vya Domus (Jun 30, 2021)

Zyll Goliath said:


> Is it because it's yours GPU or is it because it's Nvidia?


Did you start this thread because it's about a GPU you own or because it's AMD ?

Gotcha.


----------



## Zyll Goliat (Jun 30, 2021)

Vya Domus said:


> Did you start this thread because it about a GPU you own or because it's AMD ?
> 
> Gotcha.


I started this thread because I believed that AMD prematurely cancel their support for certain GPU's and especially the WAY they did it and when didn't help at all...and honestly that's nothing to do with the name of the company I can only ensure you that I will do exactly the same thing if the company name is Nvidia/Intel or whatever.....


----------



## eidairaman1 (Jun 30, 2021)

nguyen said:


> Nvidia has been using lossless memory compressions to reduce VRAM size and bandwidth requirements for ages. You can check how 5500XT 4GB got whooped by 1650 Super 4GB in some games.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I don't consider that whooped, 3 fps is not noticeable there bean counter.


----------



## nguyen (Jun 30, 2021)

eidairaman1 said:


> I don't consider that whooped, 3 fps is not noticeable there bean counter.



That's 15fps (or 53% more fps) between the 5500XT 4GB and 1650S there.


----------



## Vya Domus (Jun 30, 2021)

Zyll Goliath said:


> I started this thread because I believed that AMD prematurely cancel their support for certain GPU's



"Prematurely" implies there was some predetermined date this was supposed to happen. Who get's to decide that it's premature ? You ? What does that even mean. 

I asked you this previously but you didn't want to answer. How many years of support do you reckon would have been fine and why ?


----------



## Valantar (Jun 30, 2021)

Zyll Goliath said:


> Why don't you  take a step back, take a breath, and consider what you are arguing for and why.....Honestly I don't know where are you getting all of this...as soon as things do not go in yours direction seems like you become mad and arguing every single point.....
> Can you see the poll results on the top?Did you read other reddit threads about this?Did you watch videos and opinions that certain youtubers have about this(Tech Yes City or even Hardware unboxed)?


If you had actually read what I've been writing, you would see that this is both a considered and nuanced argument. As for where I am getting things: my arguments are from me, my data are from relevant sources such as driver changelogs, and my impressions of your actions in this thread are quite plain readings of your posts. 

As for poll results and other opinions... so? Am I not allowed to disagree with them? Or are you actually trying to argue that I should change my mind solely because a lot of people disagree with me? If that's the case, that goes a long way towards explaining your bad-faith approach to debate, as that would necessitate not actually standing behind or believing in my opinions whatsoever. I have presented both detailed arguments and data to support why I disagree with you and others who are saying this is bad. You have neither acknowledged nor engaged with those arguments. So, if you're looking for understanding of my position, I suggest you go back and re-read the thread.


Zyll Goliath said:


> I started this thread because I believed that AMD prematurely cancel their support for certain GPU's and especially the WAY they did it and when didn't help at all...and honestly that's nothing to do with the name of the company as I will do the same if Nvidia/Intel or whatever did the same thing.....


That's not the point. The point is that you made the "argument" that since they're using an Nvidia gpu and don't see this as a big problem, they should go ask Nvidia to discontinue support for their GPU as well. Which is a ridiculous attempt at twisting this debate entirely off topic, making it personal, trying to paint them as biased for having an Nvidia gpu and through suggesting a plain-faced ridiculous "fix" on this basis. If you can't see how problematic this is and how it just exemplifies arguing in bad faith, that is on you and nobody else.


----------



## ratirt (Jun 30, 2021)

Zyll Goliath said:


> I started this thread because I believed that AMD prematurely cancel their support for certain GPU's and especially the WAY they did it and when didn't help at all...and honestly that's nothing to do with the name of the company I can only ensure you that I will do the exactly the same thing if the company name is Nvidia/Intel or whatever.....


So far you have not given one meaningful argument about prematurely canceled driver support. You're just looking for a thread fight that's all.
Arguments like, because other companies have more years or because it would have been nice to have etc. are not valid arguments.



Zyll Goliath said:


> Why don't you take a step back, take a breath, and consider what you are arguing for and why.....Honestly I don't know where are you getting all of this...as soon as things do not go in yours direction seems like you become mad and arguing every single point.....
> Can you see the poll results on the top?Did you read other reddit threads about this?Did you watch videos and opinions that certain youtubers have about this(Tech Yes City or even Hardware unboxed)?


Everyone is entitled to an opinion but that's only an opinion. 'Prematurely canceled' and it turned to be sad from laughable. Not sure how long you want the support to last and when you would consider graphics card software finally matured enough. Considering your opinion and arguments you have given so far to support your opinion, never.
The decision of not supporting a product (which has nothing to do with the product not working properly or entirely), is not your decision nor there is any law behind that would regulate that. It is companies decision only and when the warranty of the product is over, if these are not  being produced, the company may shut down and relocate resources for supporting it.


----------



## Zyll Goliat (Jun 30, 2021)

Vya Domus said:


> "Prematurely" implies there was some predetermined date this was supposed to happen. Who get's to decide that it's premature ? You ? What does that even mean.
> 
> I asked you this previously but you didn't want to answer. How many years of support do you reckon would have been fine and why ?


Other people also calling it "prematurely" including some of the tech youtubers....Sure correct there is no written rules about that ...In my opinion I wish if it is or If support could be 10 years but let's said that I and probably majority of the consumers not have the problem if is it 7 or 8 years and again let me repeat myself one more time because this is very important is the way that AMD handle this with short notice that is not even 24h and at the same time they announcing FSR that supposed to help older&weaker cards...exactly those cards they canceling their support....and yeah timing was just perfect even if the people want to buy newer and better GPU's they are not available or if they are they are damn expensive.... So yeah in my opinion that just looks ugly and unprofessional from AMD man....


----------



## Valantar (Jun 30, 2021)

Zyll Goliath said:


> Other people also calling it "prematurely" including some of the tech youtubers....Sure correct there is no written rules about that ...In my opinion I wish if it is or If support could be 10 years but let's said that I and probably majority of the consumers not have the problem if is it 7 or 8 years and again let me repeat myself one more time because this is very important is the way that AMD handle this with short notice that is not even 24h and at the same time they announcing FSR that supposed to help older&weaker cards...those that you just cancel your support....and yeah timing was just perfect even if the people want to buy newer and better GPU's they are not available or if they are they are expensive.... So yeah in my opinion that just looks ugly and unprofessional man....


As I've said before, I agree that they communicated this badly, and timed it badly. I still think your response is disproportionate, as
A) FSR still works on these GPUs, and isn't dependent on driver support but rather developers implementing it.
B) Bugs necessitating driver fixes on these GPUs are extremely rare at this point, and the architecture is extremely well documented, allowing developers to fix bugs.
C) The GPUs will still work, and compatible drivers are still available. Given that we can still download W7 HD 6950 drivers from 2013 from AMD's site, this is likely to continue for the foreseeable future.
D) At this point, while the GPUs are still usable, they are sufficiently low performance that spending resources optimizing for them is a waste. Further "support" if continued would likely have meant near zero actual driver development.
E) Bad timing and poor communication doesn't make the actual actions taken worse in any real way.

So, to sum up: AMD timed this badly, communicated it poorly, but ultimately the effects of this decision are unlikely to be particularly noticeable at all.


----------



## Zyll Goliat (Jun 30, 2021)

Seriously my response  is disproportionate...Why?Because I dare to open the thread and talk about it?
Some of you guys acting like I just called for Crusade war against the AMD.....Pfff...I mean I can only whish that AMD,Nvidia or any other BIG corp. could have some consequences after things like this but I doubt that anything will change for good...especially when I see how some people react and are willing to protect BIG&Powerfull instead protecting themselves....


----------



## Valantar (Jun 30, 2021)

Zyll Goliath said:


> Seriously my response  is disproportionate...Why?Because I dare to open the thread and talk about it?


.... sigh.

No.

Again, please, please, pretty please, _read what people are writing to you_. See above:


Valantar said:


> AMD timed this badly, communicated it poorly, but ultimately the effects of this decision are unlikely to be particularly noticeable at all.


Is a boycott a reasonable response to poorly timed and executed communication? I would really say not. Do you ditch your friends if they tell you something relatively inconsequential in a bad way and at a bad time? Do you stop eating at a restaurant if the server informs you of a change in management rather than tell you about today's specials, or insist on telling you this just as you're getting up to go to the bathroom?

Discussing this is _obviously_ fine - and even a good thing! On the other hand, that you are even suggesting that the people disagreeing with you say otherwise is another example of your litany of bad-faith arguing tactics. Nobody has said anything about discussing this not being fine. We've just said that your expressed level of anger at this, as well as the concrete sanctions you have stated that you are implementing are disproportionate to the grievance you are describing. That is all.


----------



## 95Viper (Jun 30, 2021)

Get back to the topic and stop the bickering about attitudes, use of words/language, and stop insulting others.


----------



## Zyll Goliat (Jun 30, 2021)

Valantar said:


> .... sigh.
> 
> No.
> 
> ...


Again I never call anyone to boycott AMD products......I said that I am done with the AMD(to be precise their GPU department) and I told you the reasons over and over again....Now even you believed that AMD timed this badly & communicated it poorly...so  what are you going to do about this honestly I really could not care less but pls. STOP saying me what I am going to do about it...OK....If I or some other people in here don't want to support anymore AMD because of this or for any other "monkey"  business AMD or any other company did in the past well I guess that we are perfectly entitled to do that......


----------



## The red spirit (Jun 30, 2021)

At least these cards had support up until now, I remember I bought A6 7400K and it basically didn't have any support once Crimson drivers launched. That really sucked. And honestly, AMD isn't being shady for the first time. Anyone remembers RX 5000 series fiasco, those cards had unfixable black screen and crashing issues, lots of cards were returned and for a whole year AMD was unable to fix them with drivers. They were top tier garbage that anyone should have avoided. Also what about FM2+ refresh with some late CPU refresh, but lots of BIOSes never got a proper update, thus many boards behaved like those chips were overheating. And to be honest, locking CPU clock speed to 3GHz or less if iGPU is used, was very shady and probably illegal too. Like many others have said 6 years is okay and in my experience it's not a big offence. The only mystifying thing is why they partially discontinued GCN, meanwhile there are some cards still on GCN that are perfectly supported. It just seems that decision wasn't technical and AMD is typically being a dick for no reason. It's definitely not for profit, as AMD is in no position behaving like that. Most of their customers would just buy nVidia cards next time.


----------



## xkm1948 (Jun 30, 2021)

FuryX/Fury was the ugly duckling that nobody loved. Honestly I wish its driver stayed in 2016 form as at least it allows HBM overclocking back then. It will now be good for an old retro Win7 system or a Linux terminal. instead of letting AMD put more bugs in its driver for older cards I vote to just let them die a swift death.


 Dont buy cards based on “FineWine” buy cards based on immediately available features and performance. End of story. Nothing to discuss here.


----------



## Valantar (Jun 30, 2021)

Zyll Goliath said:


> Again I never call anyone to boycott AMD products......I said that I am done with the AMD(to be precise their GPU department) and I told you the reasons over and over again....Now even you believed that AMD timed this badly & communicated it poorly...so  what are you going to do about this honestly I really could not care less but pls. STOP saying me what I am going to do about it...OK....If I or some other people in here don't want to support anymore AMD because of this or for any other "monkey" job they did in the past I guess we are perfectly entitled to do that......


And I never said that you called anyone else to boycott them. But refusing to buy the products of a company on moral grounds? That's a boycott, whether you seek to recruit others or not. And I'm not telling you what to do, I'm just questioning the proportionality of your response to your stated feelings and actual events. I've also been clear from quite early on that I think AMD timed and communicated this badly. I don't see that as a big enough blunder to warrant any sanctions on my part. That as well as whether 6 years is bad or fine is where we disagree, but seeing how you still refuse to actually discuss these questions and react badly when questioned, let's leave it at that, yeah? This is not productive at all, and as the mods have rightly pointed out, this has long since gone way off topic into a useless meta-debate.



xkm1948 said:


> FuryX/Fury was the ugly duckling that nobody loved. Honestly I wish its driver stayed in 2016 form as at least it allows HBM overclocking back then. It will now be good for an old retro Win7 system or a Linux terminal. instead of letting AMD put more bugs in its driver for older cards I vote to just let them die a swift death.
> 
> 
> Dont buy cards based on “FineWine” buy cards based on immediately available features and performance. End of story. Nothing to discuss here.


Hey, I loved it! Still do too, even if it's ripe for retirement. It's lasted me six years with great->good->okay->passable performance, which is far more than I would expect from a GPU tbh. Never bought it due to any idea about future improvements, but rather that I don't want to support Nvidia for a heap of reasons (each of which is far more serious than a communications misstep like this), and had saved up for it at the time. Thankfully I never had any illusions about it getting better with time. I did miss the HBM OC, though my card never really OC'd or UV'd at all, so that was kind of a moot point for me.


----------



## freeagent (Jun 30, 2021)

8 pages is mighty impressive.

I can still play games on my GTX 580..

Mind you it isn't very good..


----------



## AsRock (Jun 30, 2021)

Valantar said:


> At which settings level? Also, remember that allocated VRAM is not the same as required/in active use VRAM. Most games stream in assets long before they might be needed if there is spare VRAM, most of these are never used and are just ejected after a while. VRAM use for the same settings can vary quite a bit across different GPUs.



Which is turn helps performance, and would of though all so would help against dips in FPS, it's not loading those assets up for the fun of it.

But as we don't know if i am using those assets while playing either of us don't know if or how much it would effect performance, but i can tell you ever so often when i had my 290X i would get the odd lockup which don't even happen now,  but thyat's not even conclusive as the game updates could of been a part of that so.

I would still recommend at least 8GB for a card as long as it was as fast as a 390X so games can store assets to help the game run smoother.


----------



## eidairaman1 (Jun 30, 2021)

nguyen said:


> That's 15fps (or 53% more fps) between the 5500XT 4GB and 1650S there.


Check that .








						AMD ends driver support for R9 Fury and Radeon 200, 300 series???
					

"AMD confirmed it is retiring a large number of its graphics card today. Starting with Adrenalin 21.6.1 driver graphics card from Radeon Fury, Radeon 300, as well as Radeon 200 series, will no longer be supported, as all these cards have been moved to the legacy section"    Wow!!!In my opinion...




					www.techpowerup.com


----------



## Zyll Goliat (Jul 1, 2021)

Before you watch the benchmarking results it will be good to listen carefully first and last few minutes of the video










Also some of the people that constantly attacked me in here claiming that this is just my opinion that I am MAD and delusional should listen what Steve has to said at the end.....
But who knows maybe Steve just Trolling you also and doing this because he is my cousin from Australia...... 




Also here are the current Poll results from Hardware Unboxed....Hmm strange almost identical like my "biased" poll but with high amount of the voters....


----------



## eidairaman1 (Jul 1, 2021)

Zyll Goliath said:


>



Turn of tesselation on GCN parts.


----------



## Zyll Goliat (Jul 1, 2021)

eidairaman1 said:


> Turn of tesselation on GCN parts.


Ohh yeah sure that's a well known fact I guess...If I am not mistaken tesselation is achilles heel to the All AMD cards.....


----------



## Valantar (Jul 1, 2021)

Zyll Goliath said:


> Before you watch the benchmarking results it will be good to listen carefully first 3 min
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I mean ... you still don't seem to grasp that "many people agree with me in some way" is ... not an argument. Well, it would be an argument if we were discussing whose opinion was the most popular, but thankfully we're discussing something a bit more substantial than that. It is proof that however many people, of however many levels of informedness and knowledge, have reacted to a thing. That's it. We don't know whether the respondents actually understand what discontinuation of driver support entails. We don't know anything about the basis on which they are making their judgements. So we can't know if they are well-informed, don't care, are on a rage-bender, or whatever else. This is part of why polls such as this are _woefully_ unscientific.

As for what Steve says: he does make some of the same basic mistakes as you are, such as _entirely_ excluding the possibility of _developers_ fixing bugs and issues - which is, has been, and continues to be the most common way bugs in games are fixed. Which I think is part of why his conclusions lean the way they do. He also explicitly states that "[he] expects [game updates breaking performance] to be a rare occurrence".

It's also well worth mentioning that his stance is _far_ more nuanced than what you have expressed here. He does say that it ultimately doesn't matter in terms of things working or not, and that it will only matter if bugs appear in future games or updates (which is the part where developer bugfixes should have come into consideration). He also says about the six-year-old GPUs in question that "it may be a little bit early". That's quite different from what you've been saying - which is more along the lines of this being entirely unacceptable. He also clearly expresses that their stance is informed _by_ their (very unscientific) poll, in other words they are adjusting their response to fit with audience responses, which ... well, IMO isn't the way quality journalism ought to work. The point of a review and information outlet is that they provide knowledge and opinions based on a higher level of expertise than can be expected to be found among the audience. Their job is to inform. As such, basing their judgements on audience response rather than, for example, the test results from the benchmarks found in that video is  ... a bit weird.

I mean, the results do show the 390 still providing passable performance if you're willing to tank settings. And that's great - that a GPU can produce playable performance six years after launch is pretty fantastic. But in and of itself that doesn't tell us that ending driver support is a particularly big deal.


----------



## eidairaman1 (Jul 1, 2021)

Zyll Goliath said:


> Ohh yeah sure that's a well known fact I guess...If I am not mistaken tesselation is achilles heel to the All AMD cards.....



Yup which nvidia weaponized, its like the late 90s again where S3 etc existed...


----------



## Zyll Goliat (Jul 1, 2021)

Valantar said:


> I mean ... you still don't seem to grasp that "many people agree with me in some way" is ... not an argument. Well, it would be an argument if we were discussing whose opinion was the most popular, but thankfully we're discussing something a bit more substantial than that. It is proof that however many people, of however many levels of informedness and knowledge, have reacted to a thing. That's it. We don't know whether the respondents actually understand what discontinuation of driver support entails. We don't know anything about the basis on which they are making their judgements. So we can't know if they are well-informed, don't care, are on a rage-bender, or whatever else. This is part of why polls such as this are _woefully_ unscientific.
> 
> As for what Steve says: he does make some of the same basic mistakes as you are, such as _entirely_ excluding the possibility of _developers_ fixing bugs and issues - which is, has been, and continues to be the most common way bugs in games are fixed. Which I think is part of why his conclusions lean the way they do. He also explicitly states that "[he] expects [game updates breaking performance] to be a rare occurrence".
> 
> ...


Seriously???Steve also making some basic mistakes like myself??I am actually glad that I hear that but also I think at this point it's just pointless to respond anything anymore to you....so I gonna STOP right here as I am OUT of arguments YOU WIN so PLS. spare me in the future and stop replaying or quote me anymore because I am not going to WASTE my time anymore arguing with person like yourself.......I wish you the BEST....


----------



## Valantar (Jul 1, 2021)

Zyll Goliath said:


> Seriously???Steve also making some basic mistakes like myself??I think at this point it's just pointless to respond anything anymore to you....so I gonna STOP right here and not going to WASTE my time anymore arguing with someone like you.......I wish you the BEST....


What, just because he has a Youtube tech channel he's infallible? I mean, _he doesn't mention the possibility of developers fixing bugs themselves_. Thus the only reasonable assumption is that it wasn't part of their consideration. That is a basic mistake, yes. We can always disagree on the impact of such a consideration - some could for example argue that it's unresonable for (especially small) developers to do in-depth bug hunting on old GPU architectures, which would be a resonable argument - but for that to happen it needs to be addressed directly. It wasn't, so one must assume that he didn't. Which means his reasoning is flawed, or at least has significant gaps.


----------



## Zyll Goliat (Jul 1, 2021)

Valantar said:


> What, just because he has a Youtube tech channel he's infallible? I mean, _he doesn't mention the possibility of developers fixing bugs themselves_. Thus the only reasonable assumption is that it wasn't part of their consideration. That is a basic mistake, yes. We can always disagree on the impact of such a consideration - some could for example argue that it's unresonable for (especially small) developers to do in-depth bug hunting on old GPU architectures, which would be a resonable argument - but for that to happen it needs to be addressed directly. It wasn't, so one must assume that he didn't. Which means his reasoning is flawed, or at least has significant gaps.


Ok this is now definitely my last respond to you because seriously after this point I am not even sure if you just Trolling  me or what........I told you dozen of times Big Developers and AMD/Nvidia are entangled meaning they are in constant connection with each other,heck many times AMD or Nvidia are the Sponsors for certain games so in short when dev. can't fix the certain issue or if they believed it's caused by the drivers it will ask for help/support from AMD/Nvidia guess what happened when that support is dropped for certain product?
Also did you hear Steve that some new games can't even be played if you don't have the latest drivers installed....I mean we can go on and on about this but you just simply refuse to listen anyone who don't goes with your narratives.....I don't know but maybe you should try and open your own tech youtube channel instead and see how that goes.... I mean why not to share all that knowledge with the rest of us.......Now seriously not going to respond you anymore...Take care @Valantar and wish you all the best.....


----------



## thesmokingman (Jul 1, 2021)

Zyll Goliath said:


> Before you watch the benchmarking results it will be good to listen carefully first and last few minutes of the video
> 
> 
> 
> ...


2015, release that is kind of BS. Hawaii was released 2013. That gpu is old as F. No one is using these old ass gpus as their primary gpu.


----------



## Kissamies (Jul 1, 2021)

Kinda sucks but kinda understandable, even though they (290(X), 390(X) and Furys) still are capable for gaming with moderate settings, they're just getting old and they've had their support ended sooner or later.



thesmokingman said:


> No one is using these old ass gpus as their primary gpu.


They're about as fast as GTX 970/980 and they're still widely used. With current GPU situation, it's more than understable to use one of those if you don't want to sell your kidney to get a GPU.
edit: It's ofc easy to say that every other GPU is crap when you have a 3090.


----------



## The red spirit (Jul 1, 2021)

Zyll Goliath said:


> Also did you hear Steve that some new games can't even be played if you don't have the latest drivers installed....


And what those games are?


----------



## Zyll Goliat (Jul 1, 2021)

The red spirit said:


> And what those games are?



I reckon that at this point all of them are still working fine but give it a time and some will required driver update and then maybe not going to allow you to even start the game...... As Steve said some games simply not going to start if yours driver version is older then specific driver version that is required..


----------



## Kissamies (Jul 1, 2021)

Zyll Goliath said:


> I reckon that at this point all of them are still working fine but give it a time and some will required driver update and then maybe not going to allow you to even start the game...... As Steve said some games simply not going to start if you don't have specific driver installed.....


I can bet that modders will bypass that at least.


----------



## Zyll Goliat (Jul 1, 2021)

Jill Valentine said:


> I can bet that modders will bypass that at least.


Well....possibly yeah....if that is just there to stop users to play the game on those cards then it should be bypassed for sure......but if is it there because older driver is causing some instabilities,Bugs...issues...then I don't know I guess it's still ok to let you play the game but your gaming experience is going to suffer and some devs. just do not want that their game is played crippled.....


----------



## Kissamies (Jul 1, 2021)

Zyll Goliath said:


> Well....possibly yeah....if that is just there to stop users to play the game then it should be bypassed...but if is it there because older driver is causing some instabilities,Bugs...issues...then I don't know I guess it's still ok to let you play the game but your gaming experience is going to suffer.....


I get your point and if a game needs some features which the older cards lack, then it's understable. But if it's just "nah, your card could run this but the drivers are too old" or something, then it should be bypassed.

Edit: Or a warning when launching a game that issues could happen..? I'd go with that.


----------



## thesmokingman (Jul 1, 2021)

Jill Valentine said:


> Kinda sucks but kinda understandable, even though they (290(X), 390(X) and Furys) still are capable for gaming with moderate settings, they're just getting old and they've had their support ended sooner or later.
> 
> 
> They're about as fast as GTX 970/980 and they're still widely used. With current GPU situation, it's more than understable to use one of those if you don't want to sell your kidney to get a GPU.
> edit: It's ofc easy to say that every other GPU is crap when you have a 3090.


Whatever reason one is using an old ass gpu for is their own problem. You cannot expect any company to support a EOL product in perpetuity.

Personally I stopped using Hawaii in like two years. They're hot as hell and unbearable w/o watercooling. I sold off my quad  290 Lightnings... back when multi gpu meant something. Anyways, I bought my 3090 below msrp right in the middle of the mining shitstorm, shrugs...


----------



## Kissamies (Jul 1, 2021)

thesmokingman said:


> Whatever reason one is using an old ass gpu for is their own problem.


Cost of the graphics cards today? Everyone doesn't need a hella expensive enthusiast-level card like yours.



thesmokingman said:


> You cannot expect any company to support a EOL product in perpetuity.


You cannot expect everyone to sell a kidney to get a graphics card. Back in the day you got a good mid-end card at 200-300 EUR/USD.


----------



## thesmokingman (Jul 1, 2021)

Jill Valentine said:


> Cost of the graphics cards today? Everyone doesn't need a hella expensive enthusiast-level card like yours.
> 
> 
> You cannot expect everyone to sell a kidney to get a graphics card. Back in the day you got a good mid-end card at 200-300 EUR/USD.


You think I expect ppl to buy a high end card? Where the F did you get that idea? You suggested that it was understandable for ppl to stay on an old ass card due to prices skyrocketing. I showed that you don't have to pay over msrp even in the middle of the mining craze which we are exiting atm. And no bullshit, most should have already retired their Hawaii cards well before this year. And as others have pined in this thread, those who still are using hawaii have put them into tertiary rigs like for their kids. To expect a company to keep supporting this is RIDICULOUS. Kepler's already been EOL and that arch is 2012.


----------



## Kissamies (Jul 1, 2021)

thesmokingman said:


> You think I expect ppl to buy a high end card? Where the F did you get that idea? You suggested that it was understandable for ppl to stay on an old ass card due to prices skyrocketing. I showed that you don't have to pay over msrp even in the middle of the mining craze which we are exiting atm. And no bullshit, most should have already retired their Hawaii cards well before this year. And as others have pined in this thread, those who still are using hawaii has put them into tertiary rigs like for their kids. To expect a company to keep supporting this is RIDICULOUS. Kepler's already been EOL and that arch is 2012.


And I said that people still can game on those if they have those, there's no sense of upgrading from those to any used card which costs like hell these days as well. I went from 290 to an used 980 Ti in Dec '19, and from 980 Ti to an used 1080 Ti in Feb '21, us budget gamers don't have high-end monitors.

No need to get angry bro, I just got that you meant like that Hawaiis can be thrown in the bin already.


----------



## Zyll Goliat (Jul 1, 2021)

Jill Valentine said:


> Cost of the graphics cards today? Everyone doesn't need a hella expensive enthusiast-level card like yours.
> 
> 
> You cannot expect everyone to sell a kidney to get a graphics card. Back in the day you got a good mid-end card at 200-300 EUR/USD.


Exactly.....The thing is that some of those cards are still perfectly capable for playing 1080p/60Hz/60Fps even 1440p/60Hz/60Fps...heck some "newer" games like Strange Brigade for example  works totally fine in 4K/High Settings on Fury and can still provide those necessary 60 Fps.....Performance was never the issue for me and to be honest especially now when we can have FSR as possible option to tweak even more between the settings and resolution in some games....but as I said unfortunately dropping driver support will probably cause variety of problems in the future for those cards....


----------



## Colddecked (Jul 1, 2021)

Zyll Goliath said:


> but as I said unfortunately dropping driver support will probably cause variety of problems in the future for those cards....



No it wont, thats what everyone is trying to tell you.  You can keep using the perfectly stable drivers youre using right now!


----------



## Kissamies (Jul 1, 2021)

Colddecked said:


> No it wont, thats what everyone is trying to tell you.  You can keep using the perfectly stable drivers youre using right now!


He probably means that future games are going to complain about old drivers. But maybe the cards are already too weak for those anyway when that happens.


----------



## Zyll Goliat (Jul 1, 2021)

Jill Valentine said:


> He probably means that future games are going to complain about old drivers. But maybe the cards are already too weak for those anyway when that happens.


No actually nothing to do with the card performance you will probably have some newer and generally weaker cards and you will be able to play certain new games on those but not on this older AMD cards or maybe you will be able to play but you will have some of the issues minor or major who knows...I don't know lets said few examples:Fresync not working properly,weird texture popping,game snap at certain point,BSOD.....etc....


----------



## Colddecked (Jul 1, 2021)

Jill Valentine said:


> He probably means that future games are going to complain about old drivers. But maybe the cards are already too weak for those anyway when that happens.



When has a game not run because of driver version?



Zyll Goliath said:


> No actually nothing to do with the card performance you will probably have some newer and generally weaker cards and you will be able to play certain new games on those but not on this older AMD cards or maybe you will be able to play but you will have some of the issues minor or major who knows...I don't know lets said few examples:Fresync not working properly,weird texture popping,game snap at certain point,BSOD.....etc....


see above.  Also theres more possibilty of bugs being introduced in future drivers the more they optimize for RDNA1/2.


----------



## Zyll Goliat (Jul 1, 2021)

Colddecked said:


> When has a game not run because of driver version?






I guess you should google by yourself first...And Yes sure I agree there is more possibilities that bugs and all kind of problems are going to happened to the new Cards....that will be fixed as they have support...some minor issue on those older cards and no one will care as they are out of support.......


----------



## Colddecked (Jul 1, 2021)

You're afraid when nvidia cuts off support for your fury... ?


----------



## Zyll Goliat (Jul 1, 2021)

Colddecked said:


> You're afraid when nvidia cuts off support for your fury... ?


No I am afraid that I am arguing with someone who supposed to be in bed after 21:00


----------



## Mescalamba (Jul 1, 2021)

I would keep at least Fury for one more year. Now is not much options to upgrade to anything.


----------



## Colddecked (Jul 1, 2021)

Zyll Goliath said:


> No I am afraid that I am arguing with someone who supposed to be in bed after 21:00



My point is, you are using Nvidia GPU driver as an example and saying AMD drivers will do this., and that doesn't make sense.  If you can find evidence of AMD doing this, then by all means please present it, otherwise you're baselessly speculating.


----------



## Zyll Goliat (Jul 1, 2021)

Colddecked said:


> My point is, you are using Nvidia GPU driver as an example and saying AMD drivers will do this., and that doesn't make sense.  If you can find evidence of AMD doing this, then by all means please present it, otherwise you're baselessly speculating.


No I am telling you that this is nothing new and If you are been in a tech world for least 15-20 years you should now that things like that happened....Nvidia or AMD really don't matter when you loose your driver support and after that point some kind of issues are imminent....


----------



## Colddecked (Jul 1, 2021)

Zyll Goliath said:


> No I am telling you that this is nothing new and If you are been in a tech world for las 15-20 years you should now that things like that happened....Nvidia or AMD really don't matter when you loose your driver support and after that point some kind of issues are imminent....



Nothing new but you cant come up with an example of AMD doing that?  Plus I maybe wrong but wasnt that issue with nvida and bf1 due to getting the game to run on Turing so like the opposite context of what your using it for?


----------



## thesmokingman (Jul 1, 2021)

Colddecked said:


> Nothing new but you cant come up with an example of AMD doing that?  Plus I maybe wrong but wasnt that issue with nvida and bf1 due to getting the game to run on Turing so like the opposite context of what your using it for?


lol, that was a Turing issue? 

Time to ignore these whiners. EOL is an eventual and unavoidable consequence of obsolescence.


----------



## Zyll Goliat (Jul 1, 2021)

Colddecked said:


> Nothing new but you cant come up with an example of AMD doing that?  Plus I maybe wrong but wasnt that issue with nvida and bf1 due to getting the game to run on Turing so like the opposite context of what your using it for?


Again it's nothing to do just with the AMD or Nvidia it happened all the time....I remember personally When I was making some RIG with Radeon 5770 that was already passed his prime and didn't have anymore driver support...some newer games(back then) has some weird issues even if the card was totally capable running those games....and NO it was nothing wrong with that card...


----------



## bobbybluz (Jul 1, 2021)

I'm glad I'm not a gamer. I have three Fury X's, two 390 Nitro 8GB's and three XFX 290X's currently in use. I got them all used cheap; from free to $150 (the Fury X's). For video stuff they all work fine on the 4K TV's I use as monitors. I also have a few XFX 7950's & 7970's stashed away that also work surprisingly well for my needs in 4K. Hopefully once the current mining insanity collapses I'll be able to find a functional Radeon VII (and the unicorn carrying it) cheap again. I got all my 290X's free after parting out mining rigs when the last collapse happened. Two of the three had never been used and none had been registered with XFX so I still have the lifetime warranties on them. I've had to replace the fans on all of them a few times, XFX sends them to me for free.


----------



## eidairaman1 (Jul 1, 2021)

thesmokingman said:


> 2015, release that is kind of BS. Hawaii was released 2013. That gpu is old as F. No one is using these old ass gpus as their primary gpu.



Sig rig.


----------



## Kissamies (Jul 1, 2021)

eidairaman1 said:


> Sig rig.


He's probably bashing your entire system when he sees your reply..


----------



## Zyll Goliat (Jul 1, 2021)

bobbybluz said:


> I'm glad I'm not a gamer. I have three Fury X's, two 390 Nitro 8GB's and three XFX 290X's currently in use. I got them all used cheap; from free to $150 (the Fury X's). For video stuff they all work fine on the 4K TV's I use as monitors. I also have a few XFX 7950's & 7970's stashed away that also work surprisingly well for my needs in 4K. Hopefully once the current mining insanity collapses I'll be able to find a functional Radeon VII (and the unicorn carrying it) cheap again. I got all my 290X's free after parting out mining rigs when the last collapse happened. Two of the three had never been used and none had been registered with XFX so I still have the lifetime warranties on them. I've had to replace the fans on all of them a few times, XFX sends them to me for free.


Aye....I guess you should be fine...don't think that is going to be any issues for video editing tho' maybe switching on win 11 possible could cause some trouble...So far I personally didn't notice anything weird on win 11 with this Fury except that my Freesync going mad in War Thunder sometimes but that seems to happened also in win 10 with the certain drivers.....


----------



## thesmokingman (Jul 1, 2021)

bobbybluz said:


> I'm glad I'm not a gamer. I have three Fury X's, two 390 Nitro 8GB's and three XFX 290X's currently in use. I got them all used cheap; from free to $150 (the Fury X's). For video stuff they all work fine on the 4K TV's I use as monitors. I also have a few XFX 7950's & 7970's stashed away that also work surprisingly well for my needs in 4K. Hopefully once the current mining insanity collapses I'll be able to find a functional *Radeon VII* (and the unicorn carrying it) cheap again. I got all my 290X's free after parting out mining rigs when the last collapse happened. Two of the three had never been used and none had been registered with XFX so I still have the lifetime warranties on them. I've had to replace the fans on all of them a few times, XFX sends them to me for free.


I sold my VII for double what I paid for it, even threw in the waterblock at that cost. Then flipped that into a current gen card.


eidairaman1 said:


> Sig rig.


That's great. Like I wrote above it's your choice to use old hw. That rig's bordering on retro at this point.


----------



## The red spirit (Jul 1, 2021)

Zyll Goliath said:


> I reckon that at this point all of them are still working fine but give it a time and some will required driver update and then maybe not going to allow you to even start the game...... As Steve said some games simply not going to start if yours driver version is older then specific driver version that is required..


I have never seen something like that. I only have seen games not starting due to pixel shader version being old or DX version being unsupported. I believe that it was that what he meant, not actual driver version.


----------



## Zyll Goliat (Jul 1, 2021)

The red spirit said:


> I have never seen something like that. I only have seen games not starting due to pixel shader version being old or DX version being unsupported. I believe that it was that what he meant, not actual driver version.










Starts at 13:10 and you can clearly hear what he said.....


----------



## The red spirit (Jul 1, 2021)

Zyll Goliath said:


> Starts at 13:10 and you can clearly hear what he said.....


And? He didn't specify a single game and that doesn't mean that he didn't do a mistake in writing plot. I have never seen games requiring specific driver version ever.


----------



## Zyll Goliat (Jul 1, 2021)

The red spirit said:


> And? He didn't specify a single game and that doesn't mean that he didn't do a mistake in writing plot. I have never seen games requiring specific driver version ever.


How can he specified any game when driver support just ended for those cards?Give it a time it will happened sooner or later........also I posted a picture on previous page with the battlefield...tho' some of you guys are been salty because that was example for Nvidia cards....


----------



## The red spirit (Jul 1, 2021)

Zyll Goliath said:


> How can he specified any game when driver support just ended for those cards?Give it a time it will happened sooner or later........also I posted a picture few pages back with the battlefield...tho' some of you guys are been salty because that was example for Nvidia cards....


Well, if he says that it happens, then his claim must have some basing. Perhaps in past some games failed on specific driver version.


----------



## Zyll Goliat (Jul 1, 2021)

The red spirit said:


> Well, if he says that it happens, then his claim must have some basing. Perhaps in past some games failed on specific driver version.


Or maybe I am actually Steve and when I saw that some people don't listen I made that video just to try to convince them..... Also I am totally biased and I hate AMD....happy


----------



## Hardcore Games (Jul 1, 2021)

I found the fluff free Radeon driver to be adequate for my media box, its stable while the full driver is crap


----------



## Valantar (Jul 1, 2021)

Zyll Goliath said:


> Ok this is now definitely my last respond to you because seriously after this point I am not even sure if you just Trolling  me or what........I told you dozen of times Big Developers and AMD/Nvidia are entangled meaning they are in constant connection with each other,heck many times AMD or Nvidia are the Sponsors for certain games so in short when dev. can't fix the certain issue or if they believed it's caused by the drivers it will ask for help/support from AMD/Nvidia guess what happened when that support is dropped for certain product?


I mean, come on, this is asked and answered ages ago. Yes, this happens. Though arguably it's pretty rare - the vast majority of games have no gpu maker support. It's also relevant to a _tiny_ proportion of overall bugs, and less likely to be necessary the more mature and well documented an architecture is. But now you're not even afraid of general game-breaking or performance-killing bugs, but _only the subset of those which can't be fixed by devs_. We're honing in on a smaller and smaller and smaller and smaller possible pool of unfixable bugs here. You see that, right? And as the pool of possible future bugs shrinks, so does the scope of this "issue".

If AMD or Nvidia has sponsored a game, they might _help_ with bug-fixing (which they might also do otherwise, though it's more likely to be prioritized for a sponsored title), but mostly they're helping with pre-launch tuning and tech support, implementing vendor-made APIs and features, and chipping in on the marketing.


Zyll Goliath said:


> Also did you hear Steve that some new games can't even be played if you don't have the latest drivers installed....I mean we can go on and on about this but you just simply refuse to listen anyone who don't goes with your narratives.....I don't know but maybe you should try and open your own tech youtube channel instead and see how that goes.... I mean why not to share all that knowledge with the rest of us.......Now seriously not going to respond you anymore...Take care @Valantar and wish you all the best.....


Honestly, I have never, ever encountered that in my more than two decades of playing PC games. Ever. That BF1 example you gave is the only time I've ever heard of this. I guess it might happen, but... again, if it does, it's so rare as to not be cause for worry.

That you're mentioning a vague and unsubstantiated anecdote of this happening to you with a HD 5000-series GPU - you realize that was more than a decade ago, right? Do you imagine that nothing in computing has changed in that time? Have you perhaps noticed a slight increase in driver stability, long term usability of parts and software, etc.? Heck, it used to be that hardware - even something as simple as a gamepad or printer - would lose compatibility when you upgraded your OS. Things have improved dramatically since then. Old drivers work on new systems. OSes are flexible and robust. Software works for a long, long, long time.

Also, I have to point out your comment on people "not googling for themselves": providing evidence in support of your arguments is your responsibility, not your opponents'. Or did you go reading driver changelogs and post your findings here when I was talking about how few GCN-specific bugs were reported and fixed recently? Oh, wait, no, that was me. Post your own supporting evidence.

As for "not listening" - am I supposed to just accept what you're saying at face value? Is that what constitutes "listening"  to you? Have you missed where I have, time and time again, specifically, in detail, and at length addressed your individual claims and arguments (to the extent that there have been any)? My responses should make it plenty clear that I am listening. I simply disagree with you, and you have utterly failed at presenting any compelling arguments to convince me to change my mind. Instead you've been time and time again bald-facedly been arguing in bad faith, refusing to respond to specific arguments or criticisms, and bringing "arguments" like "lots of people agree with me, even youtubers" to the table, which... well, I've already addressed that too. If anyone here isn't listening, it's you.


----------



## Zyll Goliat (Jul 1, 2021)

Seriously guys I am not Steve or Bryan neither I am their lawyer I just tend to agree with them on this subject....so If is enough of you people in here who have all those internal thoughts or any kinda of "weird" questions maybe you can wrote some collective letter and ask them personally what they meant when they said this or that......Just PLS. spare me as I still wish to keep this little sanity that is left in my brain after this thread....

Also don't listen to me or any of those tech youtubers maybe I don't know nothing about anything or maybe I am just some kid in the basement and not the person who have 46 years and playing with the computers since 1984 and ZX Spectrum BTW If you like Speccy check those games in my signature I fairly recently made those for this machine that also I don't know nothing about  .....after that I played with C64,Amiga,Atari ST before I switched on PC 486  and entered in PC era then worked for many years selling the games for PC&Consoles.....I also remember My First 3D GPU it was Diamond Viper V330 with 4mb....also for all these years I been making&fixing rigs....but hey do not listen what I just said and believe what ever you wanted to believe this is still a Free World after all and everyone of us should be entitled to his opinion....

Saying this I believe that I said everything that need to be said so I can drop the mic now...If someone else want to continue  discussion in this thread is free to do that but do not expect anymore answers from the OP...GB&GL to ALL.......


----------



## The red spirit (Jul 2, 2021)

Zyll Goliath said:


> Or maybe I am actually Steve and when I saw that some people don't listen I made that video just to try to convince them..... Also I am totally biased and I hate AMD....happy


Dude, I'm just asking if you know any games that don't launch if you have older driver version on any card.


----------



## ratirt (Jul 2, 2021)

Zyll Goliath said:


> Or maybe I am actually Steve and when I saw that some people don't listen I made that video just to try to convince them..... Also I am totally biased and I hate AMD....happy


Dude. That one was so low. You impersonate someone just to make your nonsense in this thread more believable. Shame on you man. 

It's been 10 pages and people been writing you over and over. The drivers work and will work fine and nothing is changing and yet you still don't even try to understand and still haven't given any meaningful argument.


----------



## Zyll Goliat (Jul 2, 2021)

ratirt said:


> Dude. That one was so low. You impersonate someone just to make your nonsense in this thread more believable. Shame on you man.
> 
> It's been 10 pages and people been writing you over and over. The drivers work and will work fine and nothing is changing and yet you still don't even try to understand and still haven't given any meaningful argument.


It's not MY nonsense I never SAID THAT......Steve from Hardware Unboxed Said that I just quote him after that people ask I google it and found that example from the Battlefield....then some other people asked again so what do you want me to said....I just been trying to be Sarcastic......seems like nothing helps.....



The red spirit said:


> Dude, I'm just asking if you know any games that don't launch if you have older driver version on any card.


Google around I found that example(few more in attachment) from the Battlefield after 1 min of search as I said I am not Steve It's what he said and I don't want to waste my time anymore on this thread....Srry if I sound harsh to you because you seems like a good guy but some other people in here acting like I am some AMD hater or something even sending me all kind of private messages...as I said I am done with this tread and everything what need to be said it's already been repeated so many times....GL


----------



## ExcuseMeWtf (Jul 2, 2021)

I like how OP has said throughout this thread that he wants this thread closed, whenever backed into a corner by some well-reasoned argument to the contrary, and yet he keeps it going to this point...

My stance is in agreement with multiple people saying it could've been handled better, but it doesn't mean cards will be automatically useless, unlike what poll suggests.


----------



## 95Viper (Jul 2, 2021)

Thread closed.


----------

