AMD 300 Series GPU Pricing Leaked

[Rivage]

AMD Radeon Fury (Fiji) OpenCL benchmarks leaked, 64 CUs confirmed

AMD Radeon Fury, more widely known for its GPU codename: Fiji, has been tested with CompuBench suite.

The tests are actually quite old, performed in May, but made public only just recently.

AMD Fury shows good performance in OpenCL

While OpenCL might not be the best API to test gaming scenarios, it does tell us a lot about raw synthetic performance.

This is in fact, the first leaked test performed with Radeon Fury, we do not know how optimized are the drivers, and whether we should expect better performance with official version of the drivers.

AMD Radeon Graphics Processor is the current driver name for Fury. If you are not convinced that this is indeed Fiji, then you need to head on to Information tab and check the actual GPU name. It clearly says Fiji (as shown below)

AMD Radeon Fury has 64 Compute Units

CompuBench confirms Fiji has 64 Compute Units, meaning 4096 Stream Cores are slowly shaping into the truth. If the architecture remained unchanged, each Compute Unit should carry 64 Cores, which should give us 4096 Stream Cores in total. So in other words, this would confirm a very old Sisoft Sandra leak.

AMD Radeon Fury beats TITAN X in Ocen Surface Simulation and TVL1 Optical FLow tests. It performs worse in Face Detection and Particle Simulation tests.

via VideoCardz

 

[RCoon]

What games actually primarily use OpenCL?

I know the Bullet Physics engine uses OpenCL, and that's it.

 

[RejZoR]

Hardly anyone use OpenCL anyway. The rest is DirectCompute and the largest majority is CUDA.

 

[AsRock]

With VSR function, that isn't necessarily true. I can still cram 4K processing on the card despite only having 1080p display... Or just use FSAA which essentially does a similar thing...

VSR will make the power draw a lot higher.

When was 3200x1800 4k ?, Maybe the higher than 1080P panels get 4k ?.

And OMG Steam overlay is terrible to use even more so talking to some one lol.

 

[RejZoR]

I don't care about power draw and I wouldn't want some junk 4K that runs at 60Hz. Using a fast 144Hz 1080p monitor and I'm not ever going back to crappy 60Hz displays...

 

[RCoon]

I don't care about power draw and I wouldn't want some junk 4K that runs at 60Hz. Using a fast 144Hz 1080p monitor and I'm not ever going back to crappy 60Hz displays...

Nothing will run 4K at 144hz for the next ~2 years, so you may be waiting for some time before that becomes possible.

(Unless you just play CSGO or DotA or something. They'll run on iGPUs)

 

[RejZoR]

You don't need 144 fps for such display to do its job you know, especially since most games can run without any V-Sync, so I stil don't get tearing and no shitty V-Sync related mouse lag. Not to mention pixels response time which is always better on such fast screens...

 

[Rivage]

Fury Nano

 

[NC37]

Sub $400 for a 390X...okay I'm interested again. I may game on 1050 but that 8GB VRAM is gonna come in handy for the long run. Especially if I do upgrade this old monitor someday.

 

[The Mac]

and here comes the latest rumor mongering...

http://wccftech.com/amd-radeon-fury-x-specs-fiji/

 

[Rivage]

I only hope that Fury X will show really nice performance in real 3d apps. Because HBM looks promising.
But... on the other hand, their legendary software engineers doesn't looks promising >.<

 

[RejZoR]

Hm, the vanilla air cooled Fury looks the most interesting based on this chart: http://wccftech.com/amd-radeon-fury-x-specs-fiji/

It provides more grunt than 290X/390X, will most likely have lower or equal TDP, have more shader and texture units as well as higher bandwidth due to HBM. I have 3GB GDDR5 now and I think 4GB will be plenty for my 1080p needs.

Maybe it's not so grim after all, now it's all down to pricing. If it'll be priced well, I'll get it, otherwise, I don't really know. One thing is for sure though, I'm not going to buy GTX 970 instead...

Oh well, 1 week to go...

 

[FordGT90Concept]

That table shows R9 290X, not R9 390X. I have a suspicion that, except for memory, Fury Pro and R9 390X may have the same GPU but Fury Pro may have higher clocks.

 

[arbiter]

That table shows R9 290X, not R9 390X. I have a suspicion that, except for memory, Fury Pro and R9 390X may have the same GPU but Fury Pro may have higher clocks.

Nah it will be one cut down, cause there will be a Ton of chips that have some gcn cores that are bad. People think its a bad thing that they do that with a chip but its better then them ending up in a landfill.

 

[Frick]

That table shows R9 290X, not R9 390X. I have a suspicion that, except for memory, Fury Pro and R9 390X may have the same GPU but Fury Pro may have higher clocks.

Wasn't Fiji supposed to be a brand new chip?

 

[FordGT90Concept]

Fury Pro is already cut down from 4096 to 3584 stream processors.

Does anyone know if Fiji and Grenada are the same silicon? That is, do both have a HBM and GDDR5 controller? If yes, Fury XT and 390X could both have 4096 stream processors. If no, then the jury is still out on how many stream processors 390X has.

Wasn't Fiji supposed to be a brand new chip?

The only thing new about it is the HBM memory controller; otherwise they should be the same GCN 1.2 or 1.3 architecture.

 

[RCoon]

Fiji and Grenada

Grenada is Hawaii refresh with GDDR5 only.
Fiji is brand new silicion with HBM (though it may have GDDR5 controller available).
Trinidad is Curacao refresh (already refreshed from Pitcairn)

edited for formatting

EDIT: It may be that both Hawaii and Fiji performed poorly when cut/scaled down, hence why we're still running Pitcairn and Tahiti chips as refreshes. Hawaii and Fiji may not have outperformed these existing architectures at smaller SP levels, make a top-down replacement improbable.

 

[Xzibit]

They should make the refreshes interesting by include the compression. That should give them a boost.

Toss in some 10-bit H.265 and VP9 hardware decode and that price structure.

 

[RejZoR]

That table shows R9 290X, not R9 390X. I have a suspicion that, except for memory, Fury Pro and R9 390X may have the same GPU but Fury Pro may have higher clocks.

I don't think that will be the case.

R9-390X is updated R9-290X. Basically give existing R9-290X optimizations and GCN cores found on Tonga + maybe some additional DX12 logic. R9-290X alone can still compete with GTX 970/980 despite lack of all that and its age, imagine what happens when you give it all that.

However, the Fiji XT clearly has a lot more shader and compute units, more texture units and even wider bus and because it's so new, it will for sure support DX12 far better than 290X series...

 

[NC37]

Hm, the vanilla air cooled Fury looks the most interesting based on this chart: http://wccftech.com/amd-radeon-fury-x-specs-fiji/

It provides more grunt than 290X/390X, will most likely have lower or equal TDP, have more shader and texture units as well as higher bandwidth due to HBM. I have 3GB GDDR5 now and I think 4GB will be plenty for my 1080p needs.

Maybe it's not so grim after all, now it's all down to pricing. If it'll be priced well, I'll get it, otherwise, I don't really know. One thing is for sure though, I'm not going to buy GTX 970 instead...

Oh well, 1 week to go...

If Fiji Pro is around $400, with XT around $500, and the water cooler one around $600...yep. But if that was the case, the performance gain over the 390X would be pretty poor. So maybe $450 on Pro if it has a high performance gain.

The 8GB VRAM on the 300s is very tempting tho. I wouldn't be surprised if the 8GB boards catch up to Fiji a little on the huge res benches. They already do vs nVidia in the 200s.

 

[RejZoR]

I don't know, you need capacity just for the textures. You need bandwidth to push all the pixels and data through. Which makes me question if 8GB is really needed considering 99% of games hardly tax even 3GB... You'd really have to run 4K on several monitors to make up the difference and then you'd hit the issue with bandwidth which is addressed only by HBM...