Friday, April 8th 2016

AMD Radeon Pro Duo Market Availability Detailed

by
btarunr
 Discuss (42 Comments)
AMD's flagship dual-GPU graphics card, the Radeon Pro Duo, is slated for retail availability from April 26, 2016, according to HardwareBattle. The card was announced at the company's Capsaicin, in mid-March. Reviews of this card could be posted much earlier. Based on a pair of 28 nm "Fiji" GPUs, with two sets of 4,096 stream processors, 256 TMUs, 64 ROPs, and 4 GB of 4096-bit HBM memory, each, the Radeon Pro Duo will be launched at the same price as the company's previous flagship product, the Radeon R9 295X2, at US $1,499. The card could feature on a variety of high-end gaming PCs, and VR content creation workstations. In the retail channel, AMD's traditional add-in board (AIB) partners could launch the reference-design card.
Sources: HardwareBattle, VideoCardz

Related News

Add your own comment

42 Comments on AMD Radeon Pro Duo Market Availability Detailed

#26
the54thvoid
Super Intoxicated Moderator
JismThe 295x2 dominated those numbers on TPU for years. It's time a gamechanger comes in with latest standards & tech. Good to see.
For some reason I thought it was going to b castrated at 300watts (making it nowhere near capable of the same feat the 295x2 had over the 290x) but I think I may be mistaken. It does have 3 8 pins so it's got the juice for sure.....

Perhaps we'll be pleasantly blown away? Except in non crossfire compliant DX11 games. And current DX12 ones which produce stutter (but that's MS' fault tbh).
Posted on Reply
#27
Jism
Anyone willing to pay a 1500$ for a high-end end graphics card does'nt care about power usage. And it's hard to top it at max power usage as well. Like anyone can see the difference between 90 and 300 fps.
Posted on Reply
#28
EarthDog
JismAnyone willing to pay a 1500$ for a high-end end graphics card does'nt care about power usage. And it's hard to top it at max power usage as well. Like anyone can see the difference between 90 and 300 fps.
You aren't getting 90FPS at 4K big guy. Anything less than that res or 3x 2560x1440 monitors and buying this card is funny.
Posted on Reply
#29
Jism
Do we play 4K games yet? My R7 270x X2 is still capable of 2560x1080 @ max. Its still the fastest possible GPU of AMD.
Posted on Reply
#30
john_
the54thvoidJohn. Stop being bitter about Btarunr's editorial from last year and move on. It makes you sound like a whining little kid.
I'll back you up on Nvidia's 364 driver branch though, they're not very good. I'm one of the minority that had problems. But, the 362 branch is that good I just miss these ones out.
More pissed currently at The Division's log in probs...
I am dragging it too far? I do that some times when I see people egger to point at one think and then avoid pointing at the same thing when coming from the opposite direction. I 'll avoid mentioning it again in the future. You are right.
Posted on Reply
#31
EarthDog
We? I don't but there are plenty of people that do and is a market segment such cards are pointed at.

2 270X's can play many things... sure. I don't get your point within my context though. Those would choke at 4K, if not because of a lack of horsepower (combined they are slower than a 980Ti and Fury X) because of a lack of vRAM. 2GB won't cut it at 4K. ;)
JismIts still the fastest possible GPU of AMD.
A 270x is? What???!
Posted on Reply
#32
Jism
I am talking about the Radeon Pro, not the 270x which is basicly a 290 :)
Posted on Reply
#33
EarthDog
JismI am talking about the Radeon Pro, not the 270x which is basicly a 290 :)
Oh, ok, your post didn't say that as it was written. ;)

The 270x is a generation behind the 290 Jism... the 290/290x were not rebrands. Its not even close in performance either (290 is around 50% faster).... so, not sure what you are saying there.
Posted on Reply
#34
Jism
2x 270X's in Crossfire is in some occasions faster then a single 290x. Power usage can be in advantage with CF. So it's on pair with 290x performance, basicly. Read reviews. :)
Posted on Reply
#35
EarthDog
You just need to make sense with your posts... you are vague at best, double talk and backtracking at worst. In my post, I was talking about a single 270x, which was in response you your post directly above that, also talking about a single 270x.

Also, 2 270x's use MORE power than a single 290 or 290x. 270x is a 180W card (so two is ~360W). 290x is 300W. Not to mention scaling of multiple GPUs, so its performance per watt in CFx is likely less as well as total power. What was it you said? Oh yes, "read reviews". :wtf:

Anyway, this is tiresome having to decipher your posts (they don't seem to mean what they say..) and correct them... or maybe I need more caffeine (doubtful)... regardless, I'm out. :)
Posted on Reply
#36
the54thvoid
Super Intoxicated Moderator
john_I am dragging it too far? I do that some times when I see people egger to point at one think and then avoid pointing at the same thing when coming from the opposite direction. I 'll avoid mentioning it again in the future. You are right.
Nice one! But don't worry, there will be more things posted we can all get annoyed over. Editorials do tend to split opinion and can by nature be 'off base'.
Posted on Reply
#37
Basard
And, holy crap, did you guys click on that videocardz.com link up there and see that sweet cooling system they have on the card.

Awesome.
Posted on Reply
#38
Rockarola
the54thvoidNice one! But don't worry, there will be more things posted we can all get annoyed over. Editorials do tend to split opinion and can by nature be 'off base'.
Editorials are usually opinions mixed with facts, and opinions are like rectums...everybody's got one and most won't like it ☺
When it comes to red vs. Green...well, let's just say that it doesn't really bring out the best in people.
Posted on Reply
#39
chinmi
still weaker then 970 sli... no thanks, i'll skip.
Posted on Reply
#40
medi01
chinmistill weaker then 970 sli
Lolwhat?

What a fucking shame is this comment of yours.
Posted on Reply
#41
cdawall
where the hell are my stars
medi01Quad crossfire (Fury Nanos)

Those aren't nano's those are fury x's...?
Posted on Reply
#42
medi01
cdawallThose aren't nano's those are fury x's...?
Yep, mia culpa.
Every slide (and article title too) calls them Fury X.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment
Nov 24th, 2024 21:43 EST change timezone

Latest GPU Drivers

New Forum Posts

Popular Reviews

Controversial News Posts