Monday, July 6th 2015
AMD Radeon R9 Fury Specifications Leaked
AMD's second graphics card based on its 28 nm "Fiji" silicon, the Radeon R9 Fury, will be an important SKU for the company. Ahead of its rumored mid-July launch, TweakTown got a whiff of its specifications from its sources. According to them, AMD will create the R9 Fury by enabling 56 of the 64 compute units on the silicon, yielding 3,584 stream processors. This sets the TMU count at 224. We doubt AMD will tinker with the render back-ends, and so the ROP count could remain at 64. The memory configuration could remain untouched, at 4 GB of 4096-bit HBM.
The clocks speeds on the R9 Fury will be the same as the R9 Fury X, at 1050 MHz core, and 500 MHz (512 GB/s) memory. One should expect temperatures of the R9 Fury to be higher, since it's being designed for air-cooled cards, although it's not expected to cross 75°C in typical gaming scenarios. Looking at the 12.5% drop in stream processors, one could expect the performance gap between the two Fury SKUs to be around 10-12%. This makes the R9 Fury a competitor to NVIDIA's GeForce GTX 980, if it's priced in its neighborhood (± $50).
Source:
TweakTown
The clocks speeds on the R9 Fury will be the same as the R9 Fury X, at 1050 MHz core, and 500 MHz (512 GB/s) memory. One should expect temperatures of the R9 Fury to be higher, since it's being designed for air-cooled cards, although it's not expected to cross 75°C in typical gaming scenarios. Looking at the 12.5% drop in stream processors, one could expect the performance gap between the two Fury SKUs to be around 10-12%. This makes the R9 Fury a competitor to NVIDIA's GeForce GTX 980, if it's priced in its neighborhood (± $50).
51 Comments on AMD Radeon R9 Fury Specifications Leaked
I hope to see some non-reference PCB versions so we can get some more overclocking especially once voltage is unlocked by the other programs (MSI afterburner or the likes).
The Four Faces of Fiji, & Quantum Too - The AMD Radeon R9 Fury X Review: Aiming For the Top
I am very interested to see what happens when this comes out. Even more interested to see the Nano, so much talk about it.
That "ancient" 7950 is built on the same node as the 9xx and 3xx series. It's preposterous to call something that is functionally only a revision, and not a revolution, out dated.
Seriously though, AMD releasing another air cooled monster that should probably come with a glass window (so you can see it toasting your food) isn't new. It's kind of a good laugh, and I'm sure Nvidia fans are absolutely salivating over how this "definitively proves" Nvidia is better than AMD.
My opinion hasn't changed. I'm looking forward to you 4xx and 1xxx series. Maybe nano will create some ripples, but we need a new node to see any real leap in performance.
So, it's kinda the same thing again, this time with Fury.
54 CUs, 3584 Stream processors, 224 TMU, probably 64 ROPs - hmmm, looks good.
.....
NOP! NOT TAKING ANY CHANCES THIS TIME :slap:
What's interesting is fewer shaders and TMUs but, the same number of ROPs. It kind of adds a strange dynamic to the matter. I'm more interested in the difference in performance between Fury and Fury X at the same clocks. Then we can do some math to find out exactly how much those TMUs and shaders are contributing to extra performance at any given resolution (given benchmark info,) and could help solidify the position that 64 ROPs is simply too few for a card with that much compute.
I need at least a 970 to upgrade from my 480. No new games for me...... Top end used to be 500+ dollar cards like my 480, now it's 700-1200? I can't even buy used
cards I can afford now. Crap.
-= edited =-
Some proof from Shadow of Mordor
Setting :
Single
Crossfire