# AMD Fiji XT Reference PCB as Short as GTX 970 Reference, R9 295X2 Performance



## btarunr (May 7, 2015)

AMD's upcoming Radeon R9 390X graphics cards will ship in two SKUs - an air-cooled one, with a moderately long reference design board (though not as long as the R9 290X), and a new Water-Cooled Edition (WCE) SKU, which will feature a very compact PCB - one that could be no bigger than that of the GeForce GTX 970 reference. This is possible because of AMD's HBM implementation. The 8 GB of memory on this card is present on the GPU package, as bare 3D-stacked DRAM dies, surrounding the GPU die, with an IHS covering everything; rather than the GPU package being surrounded by memory chips. Below is a mock-up of the card by ChipHell. It's not a picture. The radiator is off-proportions, the Radeon logo is misaligned, and the PCIe I/O is misaligned, etc. It should still give you a good idea of what the card looks like, particularly its length. Other specs on hand so far, include 4,096 GCN 1.2 stream processors, 256 TMUs, 128 ROPs, and a 4096-bit wide HBM interface, which at 1.25 GHz memory clock, will offer memory bandwidth of 640 GB/s.

While Fiji package will be bigger than that of, say, "Hawaii," overall the setup is more space-efficient, and conserves PCB real-estate. The PCB hence only has the GPU package and the VRM. AMD is doing away with the DVI connector on its reference PCB. It will only feature three DisplayPort 1.2a and one HDMI 2.0a. The WCE variant will feature a pump+block covering the GPU package, which will come factory-fitted to a 120 x 120 mm radiator. The air-cooled R9 390X will be longer, but only to house a heatsink and lateral blower. The single-GPU card could offer performance comparable to the dual-GPU R9 295X2, which is faster than the GeForce GTX TITAN-X. AMD CEO Lisa Su, speaking at the Investor Day event, in New York, on 6th May, hinted that the product could launch on the sidelines of either Computex 2015 (early-June) or E3 (mid-June). 



 

Image Courtesy: ChipHell. Many Thanks to GhostRyder for the tip.

*View at TechPowerUp Main Site*


----------



## the54thvoid (May 7, 2015)

Not long to wait. I'll not cling to any hope of the WCCFTech claims about performance but if it is, well, that's pretty awesome. Next new card for me.
It'll be weird though (with HBM) having memory on chip and smaller cards with more power.
No more behemoths. Almost a sad day for open cases!


----------



## RejZoR (May 7, 2015)

Just shut up and give us R9-390!


----------



## dj-electric (May 7, 2015)

I'm drowning in the huge amounts of salt i have to take with all the AMD fuzz lately.
Truckloads of salt.


----------



## Nordic (May 7, 2015)

the54thvoid said:


> Not long to wait. I'll not cling to any hope of the WCCFTech claims about performance but if it is, well, that's pretty awesome. Next new card for me.
> It'll be weird though (with HBM) having memory on chip and smaller cards with more power.
> No more behemoths. Almost a sad day for open cases!



I prefer it. I dislike using cases when possible, and prefer smaller motherboards when I can use them. This just means it takes up less space on my desk/shelf or other area I have placed the computer.


----------



## The Von Matrices (May 7, 2015)

I don't know if the smaller PCB size means that much when you now have to have the space for a 120mm radiator in the case.


----------



## Breit (May 7, 2015)

I wonder if there will be a single slot bracket in the retail boxes? Looks like single slot cards are possible again with a proper aftermarket water cooler.


----------



## techy1 (May 7, 2015)

Lets us all hold hands together (yea - also all GreenTeam fans too - cuz if this Red product will be true - then Green products will receive a hefty price cuts immediately).... and hope this will be 100% true


----------



## Ebo (May 7, 2015)

I just hope AMD is allowing their premium partners to launch cards with aftermarket aircooling from day 1 to avoid the disaster of R9 290X reference.


----------



## lZKoce (May 7, 2015)

Dj-ElectriC said:


> I'm drowning in the huge amounts of salt i have to take with all the AMD fuzz lately.
> Truckloads of salt.



Oohhh the irony...  You, sir, made me giggle and laugh. Take this thank-button.


----------



## Masenko (May 7, 2015)

The Von Matrices said:


> I don't know if the smaller PCB size means that much when you now have to have the space for a 120mm radiator in the case.


Hope the PCB is short enough so that it fits my Lian-Li TU100 perfectly.


----------



## timta2 (May 7, 2015)

tamw said:


> I think we just got hit by a fkn meteor of salt. An A-10 raining down a good BBBBRRRRRRRRRT of pure salt crystals.
> 
> But it whould be awsome if half of the claim was true, my current 3.5gb card needs replacement to handle higher resolutions, and it needs to fit in my itx case.



Hey buddy, save that for your Ku Klux Klan meeting please. This isn't an appropriate place for it.

edit: I removed the racist word he was using from his quote in my post.


----------



## Octopuss (May 7, 2015)

So this will stil be 28nm?


----------



## Mysteoa (May 7, 2015)

> It will only feature three DisplayPort 1.2a and one HDMI 2.0a.



Shouldn't that be DisplayPort 1.*4*a


----------



## scorpion_amd13 (May 7, 2015)

Dj-ElectriC said:


> I'm drowning in the huge amounts of salt i have to take with all the AMD fuzz lately.
> Truckloads of salt.



That's one helluva lot of salt you have there. Careful, so much salt is bad for your health.



Breit said:


> I wonder if there will be a single slot bracket in the retail boxes? Looks like single slot cards are possible again with a proper aftermarket water cooler.



You'll need a custom waterblock to begin with, because those HBM chips are likely to end up a good bit taller than the GPU die itself. I think the single slot bracket is going to be the least of your worries.



Octopuss said:


> So this will stil be 28nm?



Since it's the most advanced manufacturing process currently available for GPUs of similar size, yes, it's still going to be built on 28nm.


----------



## Breit (May 7, 2015)

Mysteoa said:


> Shouldn't that be DisplayPort 1.*4*a


No. DP 1.4a is for 8K displays, but DP 1.3 was expected at least. I mean 5K displays are already here.


----------



## Breit (May 7, 2015)

scorpion_amd13 said:


> You'll need a custom waterblock to begin with, because those HBM chips are likely to end up a good bit taller than the GPU die itself. I think the single slot bracket is going to be the least of your worries.



The GPU die including the HBM modules are under a common IHS, so I expect a flat surface on that IHS. But anyways, there will be waterblocks nevertheless. Trust me.


----------



## daftkoi (May 7, 2015)

When we are all disappointed by AMD bulldozer v2.0, hitler will be screaming at his lieutenants again


----------



## blinxster (May 7, 2015)

Why have you removed WCCftech's logo from the image?? This is not part of the common license agreement
Although you cite them that is illegal so I suggest you place the original image on you article immediately as I am ready to take this one step further


----------



## Frick (May 7, 2015)

blinxster said:


> Why have you removed WCCftech's logo from the image?? This is not part of the common license agreement
> Although you cite them that is illegal so I suggest you place the original image on you article immediately as I am ready to take this one step further



Or they sent him the original. He probably didn't remove the watermark by himself.


----------



## the54thvoid (May 7, 2015)

blinxster said:


> Why have you removed WCCftech's logo from the image?? This is not part of the common license agreement
> Although you cite them that is illegal so I suggest you place the original image on you article immediately as I am ready to take this one step further



Is the image property of WCCFtech? Was it produced by WCCFtech or acquired through a leaked source. Is it from AMD's presentation? You can't own an image that isn't yours, even if you slap a logo on it.


----------



## arduum (May 7, 2015)

Incredible


----------



## blinxster (May 7, 2015)

the54thvoid said:


> Not long to wait. I'll not cling to any hope of the WCCFTech claims about performance but if it is, well, that's pretty awesome. Next new card for me.
> It'll be weird though (with HBM) having memory on chip and smaller cards with more power.
> No more behemoths. Almost a sad day for open cases!



WCCftech clearly states what information is speculation with a *. You should read that if you want to know whats real or not

The fact this site took an image and doctored it is discusting.
Using an image is one thing, and legal. Doctoring other peoples property is no and is illegal.

WCCftech are the most honest site around who sound out rumours when they are.
They do not hold favouritism either which is why they got the image in the first place.

[link removed]


You need to understand that


----------



## blinxster (May 7, 2015)

the54thvoid said:


> Is the image property of WCCFtech? Was it produced by WCCFtech or acquired through a leaked source. Is it from AMD's presentation? You can't own an image that isn't yours, even if you slap a logo on it.


The image was given to them. NOT THIS SITE.
using images is one thing if cited. Doctoring it is illegal without authorisation.


----------



## blinxster (May 7, 2015)

the54thvoid said:


> Is the image property of WCCFtech? Was it produced by WCCFtech or acquired through a leaked source. Is it from AMD's presentation? You can't own an image that isn't yours, even if you slap a logo on it.





the54thvoid said:


> Is the image property of WCCFtech? Was it produced by WCCFtech or acquired through a leaked source. Is it from AMD's presentation? You can't own an image that isn't yours, even if you slap a logo on it.



Yes it is the property of wccftech as it was given to them.


----------



## the54thvoid (May 7, 2015)

blinxster said:


> Yes it is the property of wccftech as it was given to them.



I'm on mobile so can't see but there is no source on that WCCFtech story? TPU clearly state that WCCFtech are the source. In doing so, the image is sourced WWCCFtech too.
If the image was given by AMD, WCCFTECH should cite AMD as source. If not, its not a legal image in the first place.

Best part is, I don't care. And please follow TPU forum rules and stop double/triple posting.

FTR, I am not employed or endorsed by TPU or its owners.


----------



## blinxster (May 7, 2015)

the54thvoid said:


> I'm on mobile so can't see but there is no source on that WCCFtech story? TPU clearly state that WCCFtech are the source. In doing so, the image is sourced WWCCFtech too.
> If the image was given by AMD, WCCFTECH should cite AMD as source. If not, its not a legal image in the first place.
> 
> Best part is, I don't care. And please follow TPU forum rules and stop double/triple posting.
> ...



Wccftech is the Source! It was given to them, 
You are wrong.
WCCFtech is under no obligation to disclose where that image come from however it is there property.
If its not removed or replaced with the original I will be taking this further.

Thats all I am saying


----------



## Zankza (May 7, 2015)

blinxster said:


> If its not removed or replaced with the original I will be taking this further.


No you won't lol!


----------



## Lionheart (May 7, 2015)

blinxster said:


> You are wrong.
> WCCFtech is under no obligation to disclose where that image come from however it is there property.
> If its not removed or replaced with the original I will be taking this further.
> 
> Thats all I am saying



Seriously stop your bitching & learn to use the edit button


----------



## blinxster (May 7, 2015)

Frick said:


> Or they sent him the original. He probably didn't remove the watermark by himself.




No they never.
It was taken from them. Zoom in you can notice the doctoring


----------



## btarunr (May 7, 2015)

I removed the watermark because it's ugly. I did make it a point to link to WCCFTech. If you follow our RSS (items are generated the moment a post is made on TPU), you'll find that this post linked back to WCCFTech from its very first iteration.

My understanding of your IP license conformed to your original images (eg: images you took in person, with your camera, like the images in our reviews). This one is a screencap of an AIB presentation.

If you think linking back to your article isn't enough, then I'll be happy to repost your "original" image. The intention wasn't to rip you off. There's a link to your article just 3 pixels south of the image.


----------



## dj-electric (May 7, 2015)

The hardware world would be a better place without WCCF and its toxic, unmoderated community.


----------



## rooivalk (May 7, 2015)

if anybody want to see







- Yes there's weird smudge in the center of TPU picture with uneven bandaid texture.
- There's slight artifact (jpeg compression maybe) throughout the picture although the wccf one is actually worse lol. Zoom to the vent at 500-600% and you could see big blocks everywhere. It could be because of application of filter though.

*run*


----------



## Beertintedgoggles (May 7, 2015)

Hell, just remove the stupid picture from the article anyway.  It doesn't add much if anything at all to the story.  Problem solved, panties un-bunched.


----------



## mrw1986 (May 7, 2015)

blinxster said:


> WCCftech clearly states what information is speculation with a *. You should read that if you want to know whats real or not
> 
> The fact this site took an image and doctored it is discusting.
> Using an image is one thing, and legal. Doctoring other peoples property is no and is illegal.
> ...



Holy cow dude, you need to chill out. "WCCftech are the most honest site around" is highly debatable. I feel just from how this is being handled WCCftech are going to lose a lot of visitors. Crying on a public forum is not the way to handle your problems.


----------



## Caring1 (May 7, 2015)

blinxster said:


> Yes it is the property of wccftech as it was given to them.


Given to them legally?
If the picture was originally leaked, then it isn't a legal copy as the ownership remains with the company source.
Oh look you can stop crying now, the watermark is back, or they used the picture that was illegally leaked to you guys.


----------



## lZKoce (May 7, 2015)

Caring1 said:


> Given to them legally?
> If the picture was originally leaked, then it isn't a legal copy as the ownership remains with the company source.





blinxster said:


> Wccftech is the Source! It was given to them,
> You are wrong.
> WCCFtech is under no obligation to disclose where that image come from however it is there property.
> If its not removed or replaced with the original I will be taking this further.
> ...



That's not "all" what you are saying. And it's not what you say, but how you say it. I don't really like the way you attack a comminity I've been a member for years with nothing to show for.

Caring1 is right. Even hiring a photographer, you still don't own the rights of the picture. You are only an employer. Techincally, if AMD didn't buy over the rights they only have licence over the image.


----------



## Caring1 (May 7, 2015)

blinxster said:


> Wccftech is the Source! It was given to them,
> You are wrong.
> WCCFtech is under no obligation to disclose where that image come from however it is there property.
> If its not removed or replaced with the original I will be taking this further.
> ...


I'm sure there is a professional way to dispute ownership rights through PM, then there is your method of chucking a tanty in a public forum.
I know which one makes you appear to be an idiot.


----------



## wickedcricket (May 7, 2015)

Can you guys smell that??? Smells like a disgusting chip refresh to me.


----------



## btarunr (May 7, 2015)

Caring1 said:


> I'm sure there is a professional way to dispute ownership rights through PM, then there is your method of chucking a tanty in a public forum.
> I know which one makes you appear to be an idiot.



I did get a PM, but the PM was sent 25 minutes _after_ the public rant.


----------



## Lionheart (May 7, 2015)

Dj-ElectriC said:


> The hardware world would be a better place without WCCF and its toxic, unmoderated community.



You can say that again, just went to that site for the very first time, the comment section was worse than youtube


----------



## GhostRyder (May 7, 2015)

btarunr said:


> AMD is doing away with the DVI connector on its reference PCB. It will only feature three DisplayPort 1.2a and one HDMI 2.0a.
> Image Courtesy: WCCFTech


Thank you AMD, finally a better layout of monitor outputs that I can actually get behind.  I mean the R9 290X had horrible choices in outputs in my opinion compared to the HD 7970 and their dual GPU cards.  Nvidia stepped up to the plate with that awesome choice of outputs which is what I was hoping AMD would do as well!  Glad to see it.

Anxious to see this card in action, with it being smaller could be pretty cool but honestly not something I worry to much about personally.  However I hope it has a great VRM and has the room for it as that is something I do not want to be cheap.


----------



## lZKoce (May 7, 2015)

GhostRyder said:


> Thank you AMD, finally a better layout of monitor outputs that I can actually get behind.  I mean the R9 290X had horrible choices in outputs in my opinion compared to the HD 7970 and their dual GPU cards.  Nvidia stepped up to the plate with that awesome choice of outputs which is what I was hoping AMD would do as well!  Glad to see it.
> 
> Anxious to see this card in action, with it being smaller could be pretty cool but honestly not something I worry to much about personally.  However I hope it has a great VRM and has the room for it as that is something I do not want to be cheap.



I wonder when this trend will trickle down to LP cards as well. Like HDMI+DP combo as a base-line.


----------



## Octopuss (May 7, 2015)

blinxster said:


> Wccftech is the Source! It was given to them,
> You are wrong.
> WCCFtech is under no obligation to disclose where that image come from however it is there property.
> If its not removed or replaced with the original I will be taking this further.
> ...


News for you: *we don't give a shit*. Go troll elsewhere.


----------



## Exceededgoku (May 7, 2015)

blinxster said:


> Wccftech is the Source! It was given to them,
> You are wrong.
> WCCFtech is under no obligation to disclose where that image come from however it is there property.
> If its not removed or replaced with the original I will be taking this further.
> ...



And I'll be willing to defend them free of charge against aggressives like yourself.

No harm whatsoever done here, you don't own the original image. And if you do, then please show proof of where AMD gave you the image.


----------



## blinxster (May 7, 2015)

WCCFtech own that image and they have no requirement to disclose where it come from.


----------



## blinxster (May 7, 2015)

Octopuss said:


> News for you: *we don't give a shit*. Go troll elsewhere.




Wow,
everybody here really abusive.
At least the site owner understands the law


----------



## blinxster (May 7, 2015)

Lionheart said:


> You can say that again, just went to that site for the very first time, the comment section was worse than youtube



Yeah because they allow for freedom of speech and they have more exclusives than anyone else.


LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL


----------



## blinxster (May 7, 2015)

rooivalk said:


> if anybody want to see
> 
> 
> 
> ...



The OP admitted what he did. There is no question.

The right thing has been done.


----------



## GhostRyder (May 7, 2015)

@btarunr 
Here switch the image to this one, better quality anyway and to get rid of this troll




No way to know if its anymore legit or not but this was linked on chip hell and similar so I thought it may be better and looks a little better.



blinxster said:


> Wow,
> everybody here really abusive.
> At least the site owner understands the law


Clearly the only one not understanding the law is you, you do not own the image end of story...Anything done was a courtesy to save the thread from continued arguing and to stop someone who cannot even abide by our forum rules.


----------



## btarunr (May 7, 2015)

GhostRyder said:


> @btarunr
> Here switch the image to this one, better quality anyway and to get rid of this troll
> 
> 
> ...



xoxo

Credited you for the tip.

@WCCF guy: Lesson: Try to solve problems privately _before_ going public. No more hits from TPU.


----------



## ironwolf (May 7, 2015)

blinxster said:


> WCCFtech own that image and they have no requirement to disclose where it come from.


#keepbeatingadeadhorse 

I'm impressed by how small that card is.  Those with small compact cases will probably be drooling over this.


----------



## lastcalaveras (May 7, 2015)

Best looking AMD card since the HD 5000


----------



## natr0n (May 7, 2015)

I took a guess cards would be short and was right.


----------



## the54thvoid (May 7, 2015)

GhostRyder said:


> @btarunr
> Here switch the image to this one, better quality anyway and to get rid of this troll
> 
> 
> ...



Nice PIC dude, great find! Now, is it me or does it look like an 80's era electric shaver? 

FWIW, I think it looks pretty cool.


----------



## GhostRyder (May 7, 2015)

the54thvoid said:


> Nice PIC dude, great find! Now, is it me or does it look like an 80's era electric shaver?
> 
> FWIW, I think it looks pretty cool.


 Maybe that's it alternate function, now we do not have to leave our computer to shave 

I think it looks good as well, if that is how its going to be 100% being that it has a full cover block there is one last thing that would make me unbelievably happy.  If you can easily remove the tubes and adapt it into your own custom cooling system.  Now that would be a great selling point!!!


----------



## ShurikN (May 7, 2015)

GhostRyder said:


>


Mmmm slick as fuck... Me like.


----------



## Casecutter (May 7, 2015)

btarunr said:


> The air-cooled R9 390X will be longer, but only to house a heatsink and lateral blower. _*The single-GPU card could offer performance comparable to the dual-GPU R9 295X2, which is faster than the GeForce GTX TITAN-X.*_ AMD CEO Lisa Su, speaking at the Investor Day event, in New York, on 6th May, hinted that the product could launch on the sidelines of Computex 2015 (early June).


I grasp it says it "could", but has there anything resent, other than non-substantiated rumors/speculation?

I just want to emphasize that no "performance information" was presented at this Investor Day event.  Because the next sentence starts AMD CEO Lisa Su, speaking... some might construe that.  That last sentence starts an entirely new topic, where she was hinting such product could launch, which is still seriously vague.  I might need to find her exact words.


----------



## the54thvoid (May 7, 2015)

Casecutter said:


> I grasp it says it "could", but has there anything resent, other than non-substantiated rumors/speculation?
> 
> I just want to emphasize that no "performance information" was presented at this Investor Day event.  Because the next sentence starts AMD CEO Lisa Su, speaking... some might construe that.  That last sentence starts an entirely new topic, where she was hinting such product could launch, which is still seriously vague.  I might need to find her exact words.



Nothing solid yet. The very early leaks way back pointed to GM200 levels of performance but they were too vague (benchmark validity etc) to really mean anything.  But, the fact is, if (as they seem to be doing) the 390X 'needs' a water cooler option at start and HBM is more efficient, it points to a hot chip.
This could be good, hot often means fast.

I sincerely hope it is as good as the speculation.  If not, I'll be a bit bummed out.  TBH, I'm appalled at the current 980 pricing and the Titan X is in silly land.  I have a sneaking feeling Nvidia priced high to gouge, knowing 390X would be fast.  But, if it's not fast, well shit, we're all doomed to continued high costs.  390X isn't going to be cheap either


----------



## blinxster (May 7, 2015)

The image been confirmed to be fake.
WCCFtech have taken a ELA image confirming it.

[link removed]


----------



## blinxster (May 7, 2015)

ShurikN said:


> Mmmm slick as fuck... Me like.


Fake,
even if it does end up looking as good as that.

[link removed]


----------



## Casecutter (May 7, 2015)

the54thvoid said:


> Nothing solid yet...  I have a sneaking feeling Nvidia priced high to gouge, knowing 390X would be fast.


I just found it "out-of-bounds" to place that "performance" in the title, and then those sentences/notions, that oddly dribbled on together.

As to Nvidia pricing it was more based on knowing how seriously tardy AMD was going to be, and when it did probably would see supply and production slowing being able to fill the channel.  I mean it was kinda' the 7970~ pricing when AMD understood Kepler was out 4-5 months.  I'm not sure what to say to AIB custom Fiji XT and then with 8Gb of HBM could price out like, or how soon they show,  I see a full Fiji with 4Gb still not being all that "far-off-the mark" of the 8Gb brethren on air, although priced to push the GTX980's down a notch or perhaps two.

I'm thinking a Fiji XT 8Gb WCE, a Fiji XT 8Gb reference air (not if any AIB's customs at first), while from early on a Fiji XT 4Gb making AIB Custom OC's in good numbers, and later a Fiji Pro 4Gb.


----------



## blinxster (May 7, 2015)

btarunr said:


> xoxo
> 
> Credited you for the tip.
> 
> @WCCF guy: Lesson: Try to solve problems privately _before_ going public. No more hits from TPU.





btarunr said:


> xoxo
> 
> Credited you for the tip.
> 
> @WCCF guy: Lesson: Try to solve problems privately _before_ going public. No more hits from TPU.



Confirmed Fake.


LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL

And improve your comprehension as you clearly do not know what a troll is.


----------



## 64K (May 7, 2015)

@blinxster you came here seeking respect for your site even though btarunr did credit your site for the pic. How about having some respect for this site and stop double, triple and quadruple posting.


----------



## the54thvoid (May 7, 2015)

blinxster said:


> Confirmed Fake.
> 
> 
> LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL
> ...



See that "LOLOLOLO..." thing you do?  It is the typographic representation of an exaggerated laugh, like when you 'tease' someone or win at Calvinball.  It is the lexical tool of a 'tool' and makes it quite evident to us at TPU that you are quite immature and unsure of your place.  In our most generous and esteemed forums, we tolerate much in the hope to create, through fortitude and a cultural melee, a better understanding.

So, that "LOLOLOLO..." thing you do, in this context simply means you are of lesser ability and worthy of our sympathy.  Let us help you.  Let us heal you.  In W1zzard we prey that we can assimilate you.

May life bless you but heaven help you.

Things are gonna get sinister if you pester these forums much more.  I'm on a beer free night so my mind is sharper than normal.  Don't make me stab you with it.


----------



## LenMargaux (May 7, 2015)

blinxster said:


> The image been confirmed to be fake.
> WCCFtech have taken a ELA image confirming it.
> 
> [link removed]



@blinxster Did WCCFTech mean that the R9 390X wasn't supposed to look like that? Because its very similar to what WCCFTech posted which you said they own it. And Ironically, Hassan confirmed that it's 100% true! So more or less that is really how the R9 390X would look like.


----------



## btarunr (May 7, 2015)

More chances of E3 launch than Computex. Updated.

And yes, it's a mockup. A 120 mm radiator looking out of proportion to the card should give that away before anything else. You don't need pointless articles with elaborate graphics work to tell you that.

This is what R9 390X WCE will look like. As some older reports suggested, it could even get a fancy name.


----------



## LenMargaux (May 7, 2015)

Honestly you don't need something like an ELA image or complicated tool to analyze whether its a fake or not. Just take a look at the distance between the black plate to the tip of the output ports. I'm referring to the space where the "RADEON" logo is printed. WCCFTech has a slimmer gap or space, whereas the image from the ChipHell has a thicker or larger gap.

Fake or not, it's a nice render of the R9 390X which looks identical to what WCCFTech has posted. Probably these guys are just sourgraping because somebody created a better looking image of the R9 390X than their teaser image.


----------



## Captain_Tom (May 7, 2015)

The Von Matrices said:


> I don't know if the smaller PCB size means that much when you now have to have the space for a 120mm radiator in the case.



Even though literally every gaming PC case has a 120mm slot, but not all of them have room for full length cards.


----------



## human_error (May 7, 2015)

Sounds good - I'll be very pleasantly surprised if the card is as fast as a 7970 as I didn't think memory bandwidth was a big issue on that series, although I suppose with lower heat and possibly a smaller memory controller they can afford to run the cores faster and squeeze a few more on there. 

Big props to chiphell for leaking such a high quality image - I do like it when photos aren't ruined with logos over the goods


----------



## Casecutter (May 7, 2015)

Heck, at this point with "R9" 360, 370, 380 being just for OEM's (rebrands), I see AMD holding to the 300 Series nomenclature for the next Series as highly in doubt.

The best rational is the Fiji launch would be at Computex (6-7 day worldwide event focused on hardware/manufactures), along with perhaps the next card down the stack.  Most smart marketing folks would want the prominence of a new Enthusiast product and the first with HBM to happen on a grand scale, and those initial reviews to command the discussion.

While E3 just (2-3 day venue around gaming software), is where I think we'll see the mainstream offerings.  I see AMD really looking to build off the momentum from Fuji, while promoting such cards as making PC gaming super accessible. Offering a exceptionally immersive level play @1080p (perhaps touting Dx12 optimizations), while isn’t out-of-bounds to the cost of today’s consoles, though without stepping on any toes.


----------



## scorpion_amd13 (May 8, 2015)

Breit said:


> The GPU die including the HBM modules are under a common IHS, so I expect a flat surface on that IHS. But anyways, there will be waterblocks nevertheless. Trust me.



I'm quite sure you'll find waterblocks for the 390X soon after it's released. I'm just not sure about the IHS. To the best of my knowledge, AMD never used an IHS for any of its GPUs (not 100% sure about ATi, but my memory says no) and I don't think they will this time either. Since those HBM chips are almost certainly taller than the GPU die, using an IHS only makes sense if they'd need to protect them from damage (as in, due to the fact that they are stacked, the chips would break under the pressure exerted by the cooler's retention system). Even so, there are far more elegant and more efficient methods to handle this than a full-blown IHS.

Not to mention that using an IHS, combined with the taller HBM chips, would lead to a pretty thick layer of metal right above the GPU die, and that would lower the efficiency of the entire cooling setup. This leads me to believe that either there won't be an IHS at all (they are likely to use a "frame" like they've always used for high-end GPUs) OR they'll use a very atypical IHS (one that has "bumps" right above the location of the HBM chips, so not a flat surface at all). Either way, ye olde "conventional" waterblocks won't work here, you'll just have to buy a new one or modify the base of an existing one to fit the bill.

Also, the sheer size of the GPU package (certainly much larger than that of any GPU released to date, at the very least the size of an LGA2011 CPU package) leads to other complications. First and foremost, the holes for the cooler's retention system are going to be spaced much further apart. This would result in something more along the lines of what you typically see on a motherboard rather than a graphics card as far as said holes are concerned. This also leads to my second point here, which is that the 390X's cooling system (stock or custom) is extremely likely to employ some form of backplate to prevent the PCB from warping too far and breaking the BGA contacts or other parts (such as the dies, but not only). There are a couple of viable options here: either a system that pretty much works the same way as that on the AM2/AM3/AM3+ sockets, or a metallic X-shaped spring system (which is more commonly used for graphics cards, think about the HD 4870/4870X2, for example).

Either way, whatever's hiding under the cooling system of the 390X is unlike just about any graphics card you've seen to date.


----------



## Breit (May 8, 2015)

scorpion_amd13 said:


> Either way, ye olde "conventional" waterblocks won't work here, you'll just have to buy a new one or modify the base of an existing one to fit the bill.


Sure, but I guess AMD also has to figure out how to cool such a chip. Why shouldn't all the after market cooler manufacturers be able to do the same? Also since when could you reuse an already existing GPU water cooler for a new generation of graphics cards (except maybe GTX 670 -> 970)? If so, than this is more a coincidence than intention.



scorpion_amd13 said:


> Even so, there are far more elegant and more efficient methods to handle this than a full-blown IHS.


What exactly are you referring to? I mean a precisely manufactured cooler surface incorporating the different heights of the chips areas isn't exactly easy to produce and even more complicated to assemble, let alone the costs of all this precision machining. Without an IHS to equally distribute the pressure from the retention system, you'd have to be very precise (read: single-digit µm range) to avoid destroying the GPU die or a HBM stack.

Anyways, this leads me to believe that either there will be an IHS  with a flat surface towards the cooler or all the components on the GPU package (HBM an GPU die itself) will have the same height.


----------



## HumanSmoke (May 8, 2015)

Casecutter said:


> I just want to emphasize that no "performance information" was presented at this Investor Day event.  Because the next sentence starts AMD CEO Lisa Su, speaking... some might construe that.  That last sentence starts an entirely new topic, where she was hinting such product could launch, which is still seriously vague.  I might need to find her exact words.


Correct. AMD's officers made no mention of performance in relation to any other card. The inference of " 295X2 performance" is WCCFtech's - a site well known for its use of hyperbole as clickbait.


Casecutter said:


> I'm not sure what to say to AIB custom Fiji XT and then with 8Gb of HBM could price out like, or how soon they show,  I see a full Fiji with 4Gb still not being all that "far-off-the mark" of the 8Gb brethren on air, although priced to push the GTX980's down a notch or perhaps two.


AMD's large GPU architectures of late haven't been shown to be bandwidth constrained, so there is little reason to expect a 4GB card to be greatly disadvantaged against an 8GB one, except in scenarios where the lower framebuffer is saturated to tank performance ( downsampling, high res+ full screen AA for example). This might be just as well as the common thread now circulating is that the 8GB variant will not launch with the initial Fiji based card.
An example:


> I have shown those slides to a contact in a position to know what AMD is launching this quarter. They have confirmed that Fiji tops out at 4GB, not 8. - Joel Hruska, Extreme Tech (_see comments under the FAD 2015 article_)


----------



## $ReaPeR$ (May 9, 2015)

this looks really nice!


----------



## scorpion_amd13 (May 9, 2015)

Breit said:


> Sure, but I guess AMD also has to figure out how to cool such a chip. Why shouldn't all the after market cooler manufacturers be able to do the same? Also since when could you reuse an already existing GPU water cooler for a new generation of graphics cards (except maybe GTX 670 -> 970)? If so, than this is more a coincidence than intention.



If the rumors about this thing's TDP (about the same as the 290X) pan out to be true, cooling it will not be a problem. Manufacturer-specific custom coolers, such as Sapphire's TriX or VaporX coolers will be quite sufficient, even for overclocking, and will most likely stay pretty quiet too. Now factor in the water-cooled version, which is pretty much the same one that's on the 295X2 (except it has a single waterblock+pump assembly), it should be far more than adequate for anything you may want to do with this thing (record breakers will always use the fancier stuff, anyways).

Well, I suppose it all depends on the waterblock. Full-cover versions are indeed model specific, but waterblocks that only cover the GPU can be fitted on multiple cards, provided the retention system can either cope with the task or be modified or replaced easily.



Breit said:


> What exactly are you referring to? I mean a precisely manufactured cooler surface incorporating the different heights of the chips areas isn't exactly easy to produce and even more complicated to assemble, let alone the costs of all this precision machining. Without an IHS to equally distribute the pressure from the retention system, you'd have to be very precise (read: single-digit µm range) to avoid destroying the GPU die or a HBM stack.
> 
> Anyways, this leads me to believe that either there will be an IHS  with a flat surface towards the cooler or all the components on the GPU package (HBM an GPU die itself) will have the same height.



No, no, no, you got it all wrong. You don't need to fit the base on the HBM stacks as tightly as you would on the GPU itself. It's far more likely that they'd just "make a hole" where the HBM stacks are positioned and use ye olde thermal pads to cool them (you know, the same stuff they're currently using on memory chips). It should be enough to keep the HBM stacks cool and wouldn't require anywhere near the precision you're talking about. You also wouldn't need to worry about pressure distribution. It would be handled by the GPU and package frame, like before, since a lot less of it would actually rest on the HBM stacks (those pads are pretty soft, the pressure exerted on the HBM stacks would be either minimal, or a whole helluva lot less than the GPU has to cope with. They're probably going to use some sort of backplate because of the sheer size of the package itself, but that's about it.

No need for any sort of IHS whatsoever, or for all of the components on the GPU package (as you put it) to be of the same height. They'll (AMD) just need to make sure they leave enough room open for the heatpipes to pass through (between the HBM stacks), and that's all that would be necessary to fit current cooling systems with only minor modifications (basically, just the holes for the HBM stacks and a large enough retention system). Nothing more, nothing less.


----------



## JMccovery (May 9, 2015)

btarunr said:


> This is what R9 390X WCE will look like. As some older reports suggested, it could even get a _fancy name_.



Inb4 R9 390XTXPE Uber Water Cooled Edition


----------



## chinmi (May 9, 2015)

wait another 1 or 2 months, and nvidia usually will release a more faster, more smaller, more power efficient, and a bit more pricier. a 980ti perhaps ? probably a bit more expensive then 980, but less expensive then titan x.
if so, the those that buy a titan x is screwed by nvidia...


----------



## Breit (May 9, 2015)

chinmi said:


> wait another 1 or 2 months, and nvidia usually will release a more faster, more smaller, more power efficient, and a bit more pricier. a 980ti perhaps ? probably a bit more expensive then 980, but less expensive then titan x.
> if so, the those that buy a titan x is screwed by nvidia...


Who is talking about nVidia? This is a thread about the upcoming AMD cards...


----------



## The Von Matrices (May 9, 2015)

Captain_Tom said:


> Even though literally every gaming PC case has a 120mm slot, but not all of them have room for full length cards.


CPU closed loop coolers have already require a 120mm exhaust vent, and most small cases only have one exhaust vent.  Once you need to make your case large enough to house two 120mm radiators, then you could also fit a standard-length GPU too.


----------



## ZoneDymo (May 10, 2015)

The Von Matrices said:


> CPU closed loop coolers have already require a 120mm exhaust vent, and most small cases only have one exhaust vent.  Once you need to make your case large enough to house two 120mm radiators, then you could also fit a standard-length GPU too.



not really, totally depends how you make it and where you put everything.


----------



## Xzibit (May 10, 2015)

My picture is real and yours is fake even though your picture looks just like mine. WTF!!!

*Well at least one credible person has held it in his hands.*

No word on solid performance or release date in Q2


----------



## the54thvoid (May 10, 2015)

Xzibit said:


> My picture is real and yours is fake even though your picture looks just like mine. WTF!!!
> 
> *Well at least one credible person has held it in his hands.*
> 
> No word on solid performance or release date in Q2



Given how far into Q2 we are it's worrying that there is no more info from leaks etc.
We pretty much all need this to be a competitor for Titan X to bring more realistic pricing back to the market.
Where's the info at, c'mon AMD, throw us a frickin' bone!


----------



## THU31 (May 10, 2015)

Nice specs, as usual. Too bad they will be crippled by horrible drivers and huge CPU overhead. It is a pity AMD have given up on their DX11 drivers, and are simply waiting for DX12 which will solve those problems on its own.

Remember the days when AMD were releasing a new driver every month?


----------



## JMccovery (May 10, 2015)

the54thvoid said:


> Given how far into Q2 we are it's worrying that there is no more info from leaks etc.
> We pretty much all need this to be a competitor for Titan X to bring more realistic pricing back to the market.
> Where's the info at, c'mon AMD, throw us a frickin' bone!



We're only halfway through Q2, and basically everything says that there will be more info possibly at E3.

Patience, young grasshopper.


----------



## TheinsanegamerN (May 10, 2015)

Harry Lloyd said:


> Nice specs, as usual. Too bad they will be crippled by horrible drivers and huge CPU overhead. It is a pity AMD have given up on their DX11 drivers, and are simply waiting for DX12 which will solve those problems on its own.
> 
> Remember the days when AMD were releasing a new driver every month?


The last year's worth of amd drivers have been quite nice.  It isnt 2005 anymore. sure AMD might have more cpu overhead, but that isnt a problem unless you have a pentium or something similar.


----------



## THU31 (May 10, 2015)

You mean "go back to 2005"? They had a new driver every month back then.

Last year was great? Yeah, especially the first quarter of this year was great (one beta driver), and now Project CARS. But of course, NVIDIA paid everyone.


----------



## the54thvoid (May 10, 2015)

JMccovery said:


> We're only halfway through Q2, and basically everything says that there will be more info possibly at E3.
> 
> Patience, young grasshopper.



Patience? Nope, upgrade itch for potential 4k.

Young? Lol, I wish. Not as old as some but at 41, well, I suppose I have more cash now!

Besides, techies don't do patience


----------



## GhostRyder (May 10, 2015)

Harry Lloyd said:


> Nice specs, as usual. Too bad they will be crippled by horrible drivers and huge CPU overhead. It is a pity AMD have given up on their DX11 drivers, and are simply waiting for DX12 which will solve those problems on its own.
> 
> Remember the days when AMD were releasing a new driver every month?


Great SCOTT, I have stepped into a time warp because apparently I am back in the mid 2000's!

The drivers have been great for a long time now dude...If they weren't most of us would not be buying their products no matter how cheap they are...



the54thvoid said:


> Patience? Nope, upgrade itch for potential 4k.
> 
> Young? Lol, I wish. Not as old as some but at 41, well, I suppose I have more cash now!
> 
> Besides, techies don't do patience


Right, I am getting beyond impatient just from curiosity.  I already told myself I would not invest yet but this waiting game is starting to get on my nerves because we really need something.  They must really be working on something for the card or they are waiting on the HBM memory to kick up production.



The Von Matrices said:


> CPU closed loop coolers have already require a 120mm exhaust vent, and most small cases only have one exhaust vent.  Once you need to make your case large enough to house two 120mm radiators, then you could also fit a standard-length GPU too.



I think that comes down to new cases versus old.  Even small cases now though would at least have two 120mm spots to mount a AIO or two in this day even on the cheap but I know there are many cases who are limited still.


----------



## THU31 (May 10, 2015)

Read this article if you want to know how great AMD drivers are - http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2015-why-directx-12-is-a-gamechanger


----------



## TheinsanegamerN (May 11, 2015)

Harry Lloyd said:


> You mean "go back to 2005"? They had a new driver every month back then.
> 
> Last year was great? Yeah, especially the first quarter of this year was great (one beta driver), and now Project CARS. But of course, NVIDIA paid everyone.


One driver? which one are you referring to, 15.1, 15.3 or 15.4? That looks like three drivers to me.


----------



## Casecutter (May 11, 2015)

the54thvoid said:


> Given how far into Q2 we are it's worrying that there is no more info from leaks etc.


Well first of June to mid-month is still in Q2, and it been pretty much said the pacing issue for release is AMD having enough card to handle demand once they release.
I’d have to think with so fewer employee’s AMD’s keeping tightlipped is more manageable. As was Hawaii a calm strategy is paramount, nobody in these write-ups or forums have anything. AMD doesn’t need something taking a life of it’s own, as they realized some something like Bulldozer.  Even the supposed contacts need to know that with less folks in the mix, the chance of being found as a source of a leak is much higher odds than it was years back. Less AIB contacts are willing to divulge information past what that is pretty much given, and I’m sure AMD has kept the pool same and need to know.  While nobody wants to be the source that was privy to some piece of counter information to see where and who talks.  We should "Keep Calm and Carry On."... as "Loose Lips Sink Ships!"



the54thvoid said:


> We pretty much all need this to be a competitor for Titan X to bring more realistic pricing back to the market.  Where's the info at, c'mon AMD, throw us a frickin' bone!


That's the kind of "drumming" that doesn't enhance the topic.  I say AMD doesn't need to best TitanX, it just needs to once again ostracize it.  As they’ve in the past like what 4870 did to the GTX 280 back in June 2008, or Hawaii did with the GTX780 and Titan, it’s the shear performance to dollar that gamers savor most.  Even those looking to scratch the itch for potential 4k on a single card this round (with 28nm) is a pipe dream, for other than the early adopter that are always willing to push to the edge.


----------



## xLegendary (May 12, 2015)

From my contacts, Fiji wont even be named 390....  
Think of Titan kinda of naming


----------



## Caring1 (May 13, 2015)

xLegendary said:


> From my contacts, Fiji wont even be named 390....
> Think of Titan kinda of naming


Like *Poseidon* God of watercooling?
It's also a resort in Fiji.


----------



## HumanSmoke (May 13, 2015)

Caring1 said:


> Like *Poseidon* God of watercooling?
> It's also a resort in Fiji.


It's also a range of Nvidia based Asus models.

Sulis (Celtic goddess of hot springs) is still free.


----------



## Caring1 (May 13, 2015)

HumanSmoke said:


> It's also a range of Nvidia based Asus models.


Yeah I know, wouldn't that annoy the crap out of Nvidia 
Pretty sure the name cant be subject to copyright as the name is in common use.


----------



## HumanSmoke (May 13, 2015)

Caring1 said:


> Yeah I know, wouldn't that annoy the crap out of Nvidia


I doubt it - it has nothing to do with Nvidia, although Asus might have something to say on the matter.
Naming the card after an Nvidia-themed range of SKU's would just reinforce the perception that AMD is a follower, not a leader...although that hasn't deterred them in the past (i.e. when AMD blatantly copied Intel's naming processor convention such as: family-four digit proc code- "K" unlocked). I think Nvidia would be more perturbed if AMD copied some of their other traits - like designing an air cooler that didn't instantly turn into an internet meme, or  turning a profit

Edited to appease scorpion_amd13


----------



## scorpion_amd13 (May 13, 2015)

HumanSmoke said:


> I think Nvidia would be more perturbed if AMD copied some of their other traits - like designing an air cooler that didn't instantly turn into an internet meme, or turning a profit



Are you sure you want to start a conversation about graphics card coolers turning into internet memes? I'm asking because if so, nVidia got there first a long, long time ago...


----------



## HumanSmoke (May 14, 2015)

scorpion_amd13 said:


> Are you sure you want to start a conversation about graphics card coolers turning into internet memes? I'm asking because if so, nVidia got there first a long, long time ago...


Sure, why not - derision from bad design should be a universal concept
.One company learned after a shockingly bad FX 5800U ( I even posted a video of it on these very forums not so long ago) while one company parlayed the HD6990's cruddy cooler into the equally derided reference 7970...7990...and (hopefully) finally the reference 290/290X.

One company seemingly learns from its own mistakes, and one company learns nothing from history - or is blissfully ignorant of public opinion.


----------



## scorpion_amd13 (May 14, 2015)

HumanSmoke said:


> Sure, why not - derision from bad design should be a universal concept
> .One company learned after a shockingly bad FX 5800U ( I even posted a video of it on these very forums not so long ago) while one company parlayed the HD6990's cruddy cooler into the equally derided reference 7970...7990...and (hopefully) finally the reference 290/290X.
> 
> One company seemingly learns from its own mistakes, and one company learns nothing from history - or is blissfully ignorant of public opinion.



I think you're forgetting a few, my friend. Ever seen, or rather heard, a GTX 480 in action? Or the GTX 590 and the GTX 295? I've even had the dubious pleasure of listening to a GTX 760 reference design board (thankfully, they were never released to the public, and were only sent in for reviews).

Sure, nVidia has learned a lot when it comes to cooling high-end GPUs in a more or less silent manner. But that's pretty much because they had to. They rarely (if ever) allow their partners to mount their own custom coolers on high-end cards (see: the Titans), so of course they need to come up with something that can handle the heat (pun intended).

Now don't get me wrong, I wholeheartedly agree with everything you've said about the stock coolers for the 6990/7970/7990/290/290X. They really were piss-poor. But, at least when it came to the single-GPU models, you'd get tons of models fitted with custom coolers from every AMD partner under the sun soon after launch day. The 290/290X custom boards were particularly well done, my personal favorites being Sapphire's TriX and Vapor-X models. I never ever heard anyone complain about them, and I know quite a lot of people that bought such beasts.

On the other hand, AMD has shown that they get why a proper stock cooler is important with the 295X2. That thing stayed both cool and quiet. And if the rumors pan out (which they should), you'll get water-cooled 390X boards at launch day. A bit later on you'll be able to buy custom air cooled versions. It all comes down to options, really. And right now, AMD offers the largest number of options. With nVidia, you get the stock cooler and that's it. If you want something more, you'd better be prepared to dive deep into ye olde wallet to get a water cooling setup going. Personally, I like AMD's approach a lot more because I don't have a compulsion to buy a new card the instant it is released.


----------



## HumanSmoke (May 14, 2015)

scorpion_amd13 said:


> I think you're forgetting a few, my friend. Ever seen, or rather heard, a GTX 480 in action?...


Oddly enough I was talking about the current scene rather than past history, as my jibe against AMD's lack of profits should indicate. If you go back far enough you can find mud to throw at any IHV, but the post is a pun in answer to the pun immediately above my post.

Just for the record and not particularly OT, both IHV's have similar attitudes towards their cards. GTX Titan range might be gaming cards but they are also heavily used in prosumer workloads (3D rendering for example) - as their prices attest. AMD's nearest analogue is closer to FirePro than Radeon given the relative framebuffers. Both Nvidia and AMD don't allow deviation from reference on those SKUs. The 290/290X and lower (along with previous Radeons) are analogous to Nvidia's numeral based nomenclature - both of which feature non-reference variations. Even the GTX 480. Both GPU vendors tend to frown upon deviation from reference for dual-GPU models.
The only real difference in reference/non-reference cooling is that Nvidia has a tendency to allow both non-reference cooling, and non-reference clocks on launch day (thus ensuring multiple graphics reviews per site at launch), while AMD keep PC Partner happy by withholding vendor cooling/clocks for weeks/months - ensuring a single review per site- unless the site is blessed with enough hardware for a CrossfireX review also.

Anyhow, since the subject seems to have morphed from humour to a sales pitch for PC Partner's commercial brand rather than OEM business I have edited my original post.


----------



## scorpion_amd13 (May 14, 2015)

HumanSmoke said:


> Oddly enough I was talking about the current scene rather than past history, as my jibe against AMD's lack of profits should indicate. If you go back far enough you can find mud to throw at any IHV, but the post is a pun in answer to the pun immediately above my post.
> 
> Just for the record and not particularly OT, both IHV's have similar attitudes towards their cards. GTX Titan range might be gaming cards but they are also heavily used in prosumer workloads (3D rendering for example) - as their prices attest. AMD's nearest analogue is closer to FirePro than Radeon given the relative framebuffers. Both Nvidia and AMD don't allow deviation from reference on those SKUs. The 290/290X and lower (along with previous Radeons) are analogous to Nvidia's numeral based nomenclature - both of which feature non-reference variations. Even the GTX 480. Both GPU vendors tend to frown upon deviation from reference for dual-GPU models.
> The only real difference in reference/non-reference cooling is that Nvidia has a tendency to allow both non-reference cooling, and non-reference clocks on launch day (thus ensuring multiple graphics reviews per site at launch), while AMD keep PC Partner happy by withholding vendor cooling/clocks for weeks/months - ensuring a single review per site- unless the site is blessed with enough hardware for a CrossfireX review also.
> ...



I see. I'm sorry if I came off as a bit aggressive, that was not my intention. I certainly didn't want you to edit any post on my account. I just saw this as an opportunity to have an interesting debate.

That being said, I'm pretty sure we see the same things, just from different viewing angles.

nVidia's pitch with the GTX Titans is an interesting one: they're trying to find a way to get people to spend more on their high-end stuff, at least for a while (until they consider it's time to roll out the GTX vanilla "equivalent"). It's a widely known fact that the high-end stuff rakes in less cash than the mainstream parts (they may get more per card sold, but they sell a lot less in the grand scheme of things). Things are quite different when it comes to professional-class cards, like the Quadros or Teslas, where they make a healthy (to say the least) profit and sell in large(r) numbers. AMD, on the other hand, stuck with the old way of doing things, including (for the most part, at least) pricing. Now, to the best of my knowledge, Radeon cards, especially the high-end stuff, have just about always been able to do the DPFP part quite well (I'd say just as well as their FirePro siblings), the difference was mainly related to software. nVidia's approach was different, they crippled the cards' DPFP crunching power to some extent, mainly via firmware, so their pro stuff wouldn't be threatened. The GTX Titans are somewhere in between.

As for custom coolers for dual-GPU cards... I'm not really sure what to say. nVidia does indeed frown upon custom stuff for their dual-GPUs, which are sometimes designed to make custom air cooling impossible by any practical means (see: GTX 295). On the other hand, there were SOME custom built models, such as the ASUS very limited editions (the Mars cards). AMD had some ASUS custom-built stuff as well (Ares) and the very brief collaboration with Palit/Gainward that resulted in a custom-built HD 4870X2. It could very well be that both manufacturers (AMD and nVidia) are actively discouraging OEMs from pumping out custom dual-GPUs, or it may be that said OEMs simply consider the investment not worth it for a low-volume (high-margin though it may be) product. Frankly, it could be both.

As for stock cards, frankly, I do tend to favor AMD's reference PCB+VRM design. They're usually top-notch, especially on the high-end (as opposed to nVidia's designs, sadly). Some of the best and most satisfying cards I had were AMD reference. And this is also why I generally look out for reference PCB+VRM when I want to buy a new AMD card, even though I do generally opt for custom coolers nowadays. With nVidia cards, I do tend to look for models with a redesigned PCB and VRM (especially the VRM). Besides, I don't mind waiting a couple of months or even longer, if need be.

So, if you would like to continue this conversation, I suggest we do it over PM. I'm not sure how much people mind all the off-topic here, and I don't want to find out.

Cheers!


----------



## Casecutter (May 14, 2015)

*Poseidon *also a case series offer by Gigabyte back like mid-2000's.


----------



## xLegendary (May 14, 2015)

Personaly I think AMD always had a bad story with their reference designs. Maybe Nvidia had their fair share, but the coilnoise coming from multiple generations of AMD refference cards are quite annoying, I was hoping they could learn something from the past gens. Im guessing their engeniers  change quite often and they dont get to learn from their mistakes!


----------

