|
Pricing is at least more competitive now - 329$ for an 8GB 290X is pretty good. Furies seem competitively priced and 500$ for Fury NotX seems pretty good. Also I missed the presentation on the Fury Nano - what's the performance? Price?
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2015 18:41
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 23:39 |
|
|
FaustianQ posted:Pricing is at least more competitive now - 329$ for an 8GB 290X is pretty good. Furies seem competitively priced and 500$ for Fury NotX seems pretty good. TBA TBA TBA TBA TBA
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2015 18:43
|
|
|
Shaocaholica posted:Any pics of HBM in the flesh? I didn't see any photos but this teaser video shows an exploded view of the guts: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9-JG0Cr_B-8
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2015 18:43
|
|
|
FaustianQ posted:Pricing is at least more competitive now - 329$ for an 8GB 290X is pretty good. I thought that the 8GB 290X pricing was $429? Wasn't that what we were making fun of? I saw them announce 390 for $329, 390X for $429.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2015 18:44
|
|
|
Twerk from Home posted:I thought that the 8GB 290X pricing was $429? Wasn't that what we were making fun of? I saw them announce 390 for $329, 390X for $429. I thought the 390 was a 290X, and the 390X was some dumb market overclock. Apparently not, but 290 and 290X performance were close enough that a 100$ premium makes no sense.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2015 18:47
|
|
|
Twerk from Home posted:Do we know if these are Tonga Stream Processors, or are they more similar to Hawaii? I'm honestly not seeing how this adds up to a card that's competitive with a 980 Ti, let alone faster? That would be Tonga, maybe more. Honestly the X does have a ~$100 value add in that cooler, which makes the non-X kind of awkwardly placed compared to previous gen flagship crops. It's still going to be interesting seeing if it can OC well. That G1 does love its power though, so there is room.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2015 18:47
|
|
|
FaustianQ posted:I thought the 390 was a 290X, and the 390X was some dumb market overclock. Apparently not, but 290 and 290X performance were close enough that a 100$ premium makes no sense. At release the 290 and 290X were $150 apart, I think AMD is trying to position them far apart but competition from nVidia forced street prices lower.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2015 18:49
|
|
|
Well... They said 1.5x performance per watt of a 290x. Reference 290x was limited 225w on stock settings, reference fury x is 275w stock. By doing simple math is (1.2*1.5), it's 1.8 times performance of a 290x, which would be (0.7*1.8) 1.25 titan x performance, at stock clocks*. Now whether that's true, and if it really does overlock like they claim it will, who knows?  * using this as a rough guide:  Here's hoping we see some actual (preferably OC) benches soon, because I doubt any of this PR bull is true. I'm sure we'd have seen some benches by now if it were.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2015 18:56
|
|
|
I guess HBM makes sense for what it is. The dies inside current GDDR packages is probably super small compared to the actual package size so consolidating those dies into a new package would get you a huge size savings. I'm just happy that with HBM you don't need goofy inefficient cooling for memory as is on a traditional GPU layout. edit: so does AMD have some patent on HBM or can nvidia jump on the bandwagon if they wanted?
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2015 18:57
|
|
|
Shaocaholica posted:I guess HBM makes sense for what it is. The dies inside current GDDR packages is probably super small compared to the actual package size so consolidating those dies into a new package would get you a huge size savings. I'm just happy that with HBM you don't need goofy inefficient cooling for memory as is on a traditional GPU layout. I thought nVidia had announced they were jumping on the HBM bandwidth with the next generation of HBM, which will allow more than 4GB VRAM. It's not something AMD has any patents or control over.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2015 19:00
|
|
|
Twerk from Home posted:I thought nVidia had announced they were jumping on the HBM bandwidth with the next generation of HBM, which will allow more than 4GB VRAM. It's not something AMD has any patents or control over. Yep, all AMD is gaining now is the product itself and a head start on experience.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2015 19:03
|
|
|
So socketed GPUs within 5 years?
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2015 19:05
|
|
|
If what AMD is saying bears out in reality, then the jump from last gen GDDR5 to nextgen HBM in 2016 is a Valles Marineris sized canyon. I'd be skeptical of upgrading at all now.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2015 19:05
|
|
|
FaustianQ posted:If what AMD is saying bears out in reality, then the jump from last gen GDDR5 to nextgen HBM in 2016 is a Valles Marineris sized canyon. I'd be skeptical of upgrading at all now. That and finally getting out of 28nm to make chips up to holding their end up should make for a huge performance leap. The experience from Fury may really show its worth there. Also those cards generally do look good.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2015 19:14
|
|
|
Look what I found. http://www.evga.com/articles/00935/EVGA-GeForce-GTX-TITAN-X-HYBRID/
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2015 20:21
|
|
|
HELLFISH88 posted:Look what I found. We told you about that  lol
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2015 20:21
|
|
|
I'm pretty sure I've posted like a full page of posts mentioning it and how I think it's the best thing and about goddamn time they start putting AIO loops on GPUs rather than just for CPUs that have like a third the TDP and coolers that can compete. Finally we're getting high end products with high end cooling solutions.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2015 20:28
|
|
|
xthetenth posted:Also those cards generally do look good.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2015 20:28
|
|
|
THE DOG HOUSE posted:We told you about that Well it's out of stock everywhere. And by everywhere I mean Newegg and Amazon. Amazon is citing a 1 to 2 month wait time, what are the odds that will actually be the case? Because guys.....I think i'm in love. Expensive,excessive and possibly irrational love.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2015 20:28
|
|
|
HELLFISH88 posted:Because guys.....I think i'm in love. Expensive,excessive and possibly irrational love. Cool quiet and fast is a heck of a card. Also I should probably blow your mind and tell you to look up what the Fury X looks like.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2015 20:32
|
|
|
HELLFISH88 posted:Well it's out of stock everywhere. And by everywhere I mean Newegg and Amazon. Amazon is citing a 1 to 2 month wait time, what are the odds that will actually be the case? I dont think anybody knows. Keep in mind you can use the 980ti ones as well they are the same thing. Or this https://www.nzxt.com/product/detail/138-kraken-g10-gpu-bracket.html I had a G10 on a 780ti and I hit 50 degrees C fully overclocked. Might not be technically as good cooling on the board itself but the important part is the GPU.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2015 20:34
|
|
|
Shaocaholica posted:I guess HBM makes sense for what it is. The dies inside current GDDR packages is probably super small compared to the actual package size so consolidating those dies into a new package would get you a huge size savings. I'm just happy that with HBM you don't need goofy inefficient cooling for memory as is on a traditional GPU layout. AMD has HBM exclusivity for all of 2015. Pascal will ship with HBM2, as will Arctic Islands. AMD is basically getting ahead through experience working with the new stuff, although there does exist a broad patent that's probably shared with Intel but could be leveraged against Nvidia, if they decided that was a good idea.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2015 20:46
|
|
|
I guess with HBM there's going to be less variance in vendor VRAM configurations since you need to buy the GPU and VRAM as a fused package.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2015 20:49
|
|
|
I'm wondering if Nvidia won't do the same as AMD is now with HBM2 - enthusiast products HBM2, everything else GDDR5. Arctic Islands is R5 GDDR5, R7 HBM1, R9 HBM2?
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2015 20:51
|
|
|
SwissArmyDruid posted:AMD has HBM exclusivity for all of 2015. Pascal will ship with HBM2, as will Arctic Islands. It looks like Pascal's very firmly committed to HBM 2, and you pretty much don't change stuff like that without serious rework. Shaocaholica posted:I guess with HBM there's going to be less variance in vendor VRAM configurations since you need to buy the GPU and VRAM as a fused package. That and that I'm pretty sure making it is a pure Hynix show at least for a while.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2015 20:51
|
|
|
Shaocaholica posted:I guess with HBM there's going to be less variance in vendor VRAM configurations since you need to buy the GPU and VRAM as a fused package. Which is cool, in the past I've seen huge differences in memory OC due to brand. Less now, though. edit: http://www.ebay.com/itm/EVGA-GeForc...=item33a38518f1 what a deal! penus penus penus fucked around with this message at 20:56 on Jun 16, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2015 20:51
|
|
|
Are all the GDDR makers in korea? Taiwan?
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2015 20:57
|
|
|
OK So I have been thinking, 400 dollars is a lot of money. Kind of. What if I just buy a Fury X for now to hold me over until Nvidia releases Pascal and thier own HBM. Then I can sell the Fury X for % and drop the big money on the next generation of Nvidia. Do you think losing out on the Gsync in my monitor will even matter?
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2015 21:00
|
|
|
HELLFISH88 posted:OK So I have been thinking, 400 dollars is a lot of money. Kind of. What if I just buy a Fury X for now to hold me over until Nvidia releases Pascal and thier own HBM. Then I can sell the Fury X for % and drop the big money on the next generation of Nvidia. Do you own a card? Is $400 what you have to spend? Previously you implied you were buying a Titan X with water cooling... does you monitor already have Gsync?
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2015 21:02
|
|
|
HELLFISH88 posted:OK So I have been thinking, 400 dollars is a lot of money. Kind of. What if I just buy a Fury X for now to hold me over until Nvidia releases Pascal and thier own HBM. Then I can sell the Fury X for % and drop the big money on the next generation of Nvidia. What gaming needs do you have that a GTX 970 doesn't meet?
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2015 21:03
|
|
|
THE DOG HOUSE posted:Do you own a card? Is $400 what you have to spend? Previously you implied you were buying a Titan X with water cooling... does you monitor already have Gsync? Yeah I have a 4k with gsync and a GTX 780 which is woefully under qualified for my new monitor. Ergo the upgrade. I can afford the Titan X Hybrid and it would give me what I want but im wondering If I could avoid paying 100% of the premium and just ride it out on the fury X until Pascal. God I hate how they time these releases, they know exactly how to gently caress with us.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2015 21:06
|
|
|
It's probably a little too soon to know how good the fury X is since we haven't seen any benchmarks on it yet so who knows if it can hold you off.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2015 21:11
|
|
|
Twerk from Home posted:What gaming needs do you have that a GTX 970 doesn't meet? Planetside 2 Ultra GTA V Ultra MW:O Ultra BF4 Ultra ARMA Ultra EVE Online Ultra (LOL) Total War: Rome II Ultra All in 4k. I want it all.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2015 21:11
|
|
|
Twerk from Home posted:What gaming needs do you have that a GTX 970 doesn't meet? This man speaks wisdom. If you don't need a card don't buy a card. After that, the next question is how much depreciation over time you're prepared to take. Are you okay with a Fury/980 Ti losing $300 in a generation, or does a 970 that only loses $100 sound more your speed (guessing on the expected value losses, they might be bigger). Trading in mid range cards more frequently gets you better performance for much of the lifecycle for a similar outlay of money than riding a higher end into the ground. For example compare a guy who got a 770 and traded it in for a 970 to one who got a 780 Ti. The guy with the 970 now has better performance and has spent less money in all likelihood. High end cards mainly make sense for people who trade them in quickly, they lose value too fast to make holding on to them a good option especially if you resell old GPUs. Yes I'm trying to convince myself to stay with my 970 why do you ask? Edit: If you value acceptable 4k performance for now till Pascal at $350 or more and have gsync, 980 Ti hybrid no question. No this will not get you 4k ultra but it will get you the maximum affordable performance with gsync until Pascal. Consider Fury if you value having gsync working for that time at $100 or less. xthetenth fucked around with this message at 21:18 on Jun 16, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2015 21:13
|
|
|
HELLFISH88 posted:Planetside 2 Ultra How many of those are being hell-choked to death by your cpu?
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2015 21:14
|
|
|
El Scotch posted:How many of those are being hell-choked to death by your cpu? All of them at 4K, I'd bet.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2015 21:18
|
|
|
El Scotch posted:How many of those are being hell-choked to death by your cpu? Pretty much all of them Edit: Actually I don't know about GTAV and BF4, but other games are really hungry for great CPU performance.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2015 21:18
|
|
We have to wait for benches before we can really say much of anything, though extrapolating from the compute numbers they showed the Fury X should be a bit faster than a Titan X. Still, sometimes these numbers can be misleading and there are a ton of other factors to account for so really the only thing to do is wait and see how things shake out in real world testing. 
|
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2015 21:18
|
|
|
El Scotch posted:How many of those are being hell-choked to death by your cpu? I have a 4th generation Intel which is doing the job quite well at 1080p. Not sure how well that will carry over to the 4k. I have been trying to put off buying a new processor until Black friday/cyber monday.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2015 21:19
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 23:39 |
|
|
El Scotch posted:How many of those are being hell-choked to death by your cpu? I think Planetside 2, EVE and Total War: Rome II are all gonna be CPU limited looking at that list.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2015 21:19
|
|
