Radeon Fury to be slower than GTX 980 Ti

[Luka KLLP]

So apparently the AMD Radeon Fury will be just a bit slower than the 980 Ti:
http://nl.hardware.info/nieuws/43996/computex-amd-toont-fiji-videokaart-achter-gesloten-deuren (sorry for Dutch site, couldn't find the news anywhere else)
Power consumption probably a bit higher than the 980 Ti, and it will be cooled with a 120mm radiator with two fans.
Honestly, I'm a bit disappointed, but we'll have to wait for the actual launch and price to conclude anything I guess

 

[RCoon]

They don't even have a source, merely "We caught on..." during some ominous activity at Computex

"A Titan X-killer we do not expect: we caught on that the performance level slightly below that of the Nvidia GeForce GTX 980 Ti would be. For this purpose, the clock frequency will increase to more than 1 GHz. The power was called 'under the 300 watt, "we probably can deduce that the consumption above that of the 980 Ti and Titan X will lie. Namely both those cards have a TDP of 250 watts, which is often not achieved in practice."

 

[FordGT90Concept]

Don't count your chickens before the eggs hatch. The card should launch this month.

 

[Xzibit]

They don't even have a source, merely "We caught on..." during some ominous activity at Computex

Probably the Nvidia booth

There is also this...

PCGameshardware.de

 

[Cartel]

I can still use my CRT on the 980ti though...

 

[FordGT90Concept]

Indeed, AMD axed the RAMDAC on the high end cards. I'm planning on buying one of these to keep VGA support alive going forward:
StarTech DisplayPort™ 1.2 to VGA Adapter Converter – DP to VGA – 1920x1200

 

[the54thvoid]

I'm happy to be open minded on performance. Not buying till I see it's reviews. I'll say this, unless they're neck and neck, much hatred there will be.

 

[Luka KLLP]

I'm happy to be open minded on performance. Not buying till I see it's reviews. I'll say this, unless they're neck and neck, much hatred there will be.

To be sure. It'll probably also be better for us consumers if the performance is really close and they start some sort of price war

 

[Ferrum Master]

Indeed, AMD axed the RAMDAC on the high end cards. I'm planning on buying one of these to keep VGA support alive going forward:
StarTech DisplayPort™ 1.2 to VGA Adapter Converter – DP to VGA – 1920x1200

Anyone actually tried these?

 

[NC37]

To be sure. It'll probably also be better for us consumers if the performance is really close and they start some sort of price war

Exactly. And because AMD will always be lower, it'll be a benefit to consumers.

What really will matter is if AMD did in fact rehash the rest of the line or brought out new toys. Reports have favored both possibilities but I think it is safe to say that HBM will only be on the 390X for this gen until yields get higher.

However, any of this is moot until DX12 ships. That may be more of a deciding factor as AMD hardware will score some big gains from it.

 

[FordGT90Concept]

Anyone actually tried these?

Yuck! Suitable only for primitive 2D desktop displaying.

 

[SASBehrooz]

R9 390X may be faster than GTX 980 Ti by 5-10% ( lets say Draw with TITAN X ). which means GTX 980 Ti "OC" will beat R9 390X in FPS .and will be better in Temperature , Noise , Power , Drivers , Technology and finally " Price ". Why price ? because AMD didnt released any GPU since R9 295X2 in April 2014 , so they lost consumers and markets ( financial issues ) and they must price that Card + $700. So the winner card will be GTX 980 Ti for sure.
if 390X be better than TITAN X ( +10% ) , then GTX 980 Ti OC will be close to 390X and again would be a better choice performance per dollar.

 

[erocker]

Wow, this FUD story sure is making its rounds. Slower, faster, whatever this is all based on nothing.

 

[64K]

R9 390X may be faster than GTX 980 Ti by 5-10% ( lets say Draw with TITAN X ). which means GTX 980 Ti "OC" will beat R9 390X in FPS .and will be better in Temperature , Noise , Power , Drivers , Technology and finally " Price ". Why price ? because AMD didnt released any GPU since R9 295X2 in April 2014 , so they lost consumers and markets ( financial issues ) and they must price that Card + $700. So the winner card will be GTX 980 Ti for sure.
if 390X be better than TITAN X ( +10% ) , then GTX 980 Ti OC will be close to 390X and again would be a better choice performance per dollar.

We will have to see the performance of the 390x overclocked and the price before knowing whether the 390x or the 980 Ti is the better deal. You can't compare an overclocked 980 Ti to a non overclocked 390x.

 

[GhostRyder]

We will have to see the performance of the 390x overclocked and the price before knowing whether the 390x or the 980 Ti is the better deal. You can't compare an overclocked 980 Ti to a non overclocked 390x.

Especially seeing as one of those is not in the public yet, though the possibility still stands that the Radeon Fury is slower but we will have to see that in person. However the only things we can guess at are based on the rough specs of other cards out there. But even then that does not translate to the real world

 

[Steevo]

Merely based on the 4096 shaders and if all else were the same, scaling not being perfect and their listed speeds so far it should push the Fury "XT" variety to about 5-20% faster than the Titan-X before any overclocks. 45% more shaders etc.

 

[Tatty_Two]

Wow, this FUD story sure is making its rounds. Slower, faster, whatever this is all based on nothing.

And so the cycle continues Fud >>> Speculation >>> Arguments >>> More Fud >>> more arguments >>>> More speculation >>> Blah Blah

 

[Fluffmeister]

If it's faster then by rights it should also cost > $650, equally the talk of lower yields and it being generally more expensive to manufacture may also force their hand when it comes to pricing.

Even if it faster, an apparently expensive hard to find part isn't really what they need right now.

Exciting times ahead, glad it will be become clear soon though, it is getting boring now waiting for it.

 

[SASBehrooz]

We will have to see the performance of the 390x overclocked and the price before knowing whether the 390x or the 980 Ti is the better deal. You can't compare an overclocked 980 Ti to a non overclocked 390x.

yes of course we cant say anything right now and we better wait to see . BUT According to GTX 980 Ti Overclocking review : http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/NVIDIA/GeForce_GTX_980_Ti/34.html
and some benchmarks around the web that shows 390X will not be faster than TITAN X by 5-10 % . no matter how much performance 390X OC will have . 980 ti will ( or might ) be better choice in price point and performance.

lets just wait and stop talking and comparing about unreleased GPU

 

[jboydgolfer]

Anyone actually tried these?

View attachment 65327

OH!!! Sweet!!! I see You found a Leaked image of the New AMD GPU ....
Seriously tho , They better come through this year, I've stuck with them through thick, and thin, and on , and on, and Now Im running out of reasons NOT to switch, I DO love My AMD GpU's tho.

 

[HumanSmoke]

They don't even have a source, merely "We caught on..." during some ominous activity at Computex

Oddly enough, Sweclockers (who usually have an OK strike rate for breaking stories), also reported much the same. Possible $600 price tag, and some not insignificant yield issues.

Probably the Nvidia booth

They don't even have a source, merely "We caught on..." during some ominous activity at Computex

Well, one source definitely isn't from Nvidia. I posted this a day or so ago in a different thread. While it is ostensively about noted Nvidia hater Charlie's revelations about the GTX 980 Ti ( every single one of which is totally wrong except the base clock- quelle surprise), there is an observation about Fiji: "Fiji seems to be a bit downgraded from what we heard"

So, it could be that the Fiji observation is there just to give Charlie a 100% record in getting it wrong, and AMD are sandbagging, or it could be that people are just connecting dots - in which case the delay could be either the yield issue or the clock retune rather than both. I for one certainly hope the card eventuates and kicks some butt. The market share numbers are edging towards the unhealthy side for sustainable competition with Nvidia piling it on to the tune of 80% or so - the pendulum needs to swing back.

 

[RCoon]

Oddly enough, Sweclockers (who usually have an OK strike rate for breaking stories), also reported much the same. Possible $600 price tag, and some not insignificant yield issues.

Well, one source definitely isn't from Nvidia. I posted this a day or so ago in a different thread. While it is ostensively about noted Nvidia hater Charlie's revelations about the GTX 980 Ti ( every single one of which is totally wrong except the base clock- quelle surprise), there is an observation about Fiji: "Fiji seems to be a bit downgraded from what we heard"

So, it could be that the Fiji observation is there just to give Charlie a 100% record in getting it wrong, and AMD are sandbagging, or it could be that people are just connecting dots - in which case the delay could be either the yield issue or the clock retune rather than both. I for one certainly hope the card eventuates and kicks some butt. The market share numbers are edging towards the unhealthy side for sustainable competition with Nvidia piling it on to the tune of 80% or so - the pendulum needs to swing back.

Wow, his article is so blatantly wrong. The 980ti isn't just a higher binned higher clocked 980. How is that guy still press? Or do they keep him on for clickbait purposes?

 

[FordGT90Concept]

Wait, what? R9 3## got delayed? No longer launching in June?

 

[HumanSmoke]

Wow, his article is so blatantly wrong. The 980ti isn't just a higher binned higher clocked 980.

The funny/sad thing is, that he quoted 1GHz for the 980 Ti as being a higher bin than the 980 which has a base clock of...1127 MHz ! His idea of a " higher bin" is actually 127MHz less than the supposedly slower part.

How is that guy still press?

He feeds the conspiracy line and those susceptible lap it up like the fat kid at an all you can eat smorgasbord. Keep playing the "only we can see what's REALLY going on" card long enough, and they'll revel in their unique "insight".

Or do they keep him on for clickbait purposes?

I think he owns the site, so there's a direct correlation between his contributions and the clickbait ratio. Having said that, he caters to the disenfranchised AMD evangelists, so I doubt any of them actually noticed any discrepancy between fact and fiction with an Nvidia product...assuming any of them actually read it in the first place since it didn't have some inflammatory Weekly World News style headline.

 

[GreiverBlade]

just in case ... even if Fiji is a bit slower than a 980Ti (serious doubt about it ... wait and see eh? ) it's a 2015 gpu versus a 2015 gpu, but for now AMD is still on nvidia with a 2013 gpu ... the only gpu that took over by a significant enough margin is the 980Ti (NO, the Titanics... Titan X sorry ... doesn't count, paying 5.5 time the price you can get for a 290 to get that one is not what i call a good deal)

real life situation over benchmark and speculation, thanks.
after all it's what i see from day to day with my rig and friends rig: 290 vs 970 and even a 980, for all the games we play in common: no big differences in play-ability (all maxed ofc, most of the time) , again you can go with power consumption but for me it doesn't matter, personal and case to case rule apply.