Saturday, June 13th 2015

AMD Radeon R9 Fury X Pictured Some More

Here are some of the clearest pictures of AMD's next-generation flagship graphics card, the Radeon R9 Fury X. Much like the R9 295X2, this card features an AIO liquid cooling solution. With the relocation of memory from chips surrounding the GPU to the GPU package as stacked HBM, the resulting PCB space savings translate into a card that's very compact. Under its hood is a full-coverage liquid cooling pump-block, which is plumbed to a thick 120 mm x 120 mm radiator. The card draws power from a pair of 8-pin PCIe power connectors. Display outputs include three DisplayPort 1.2a, and one HDMI 2.0.
Source: PC Perspective
Add your own comment

98 Comments on AMD Radeon R9 Fury X Pictured Some More

#2
newtekie1
Semi-Retired Folder
Two 8-Pins? So we can expect the power draw to surpass the 300w mark.
Posted on Reply
#3
kiddagoat
I like it, picking up one myself when they become available.
Posted on Reply
#4
Marian Popa
As a 780ti owner, an having been through 270x,280x and 780, I gotta say kudos to team Red . Can't wait to check this model out in a store soon, or even better : in my own system.
Posted on Reply
#5
jigar2speed
newtekie1 said:
Two 8-Pins? So we can expect the power draw to surpass the 300w mark.
Yap but its still just 50 Watts up from TITAN X...
Posted on Reply
#6
newtekie1
Semi-Retired Folder
jigar2speed said:
Yap but its still just 50 Watts up from TITAN X...
Assuming it only hits 300w, with 2 8-pins AMD has 375w to play with.
Posted on Reply
#7
SimpleTECH
Interesting that AMD went with a Gentle Typhoon (Nidec Servo) as their fan choice.
Posted on Reply
#8
btarunr
Editor & Senior Moderator
Liquid cooling people should be excited because this card is truly single-slot capable (unlike Titan-X), if you give it a custom full-coverage block. The reference card is 2-slot only because the reference cooler has a pump+block inside. If you have your own loop with pumps and res sitting outside, then this card will look epic. With custom (real) liquid cooling and unlocked voltage limits, this card could be epic.
Posted on Reply
#9
ZoneDymo
Love it, love the fan, love the little box that makes the fan and radiator seem one item, love the sleeved tubes for the water, love the cards look.

Now I just need it to preform properly :)
Posted on Reply
#10
xfia
just one thing.. 4gb vram yet the 390x is standard 8gb. it could use more in crossfire but hbm1 cant.
Posted on Reply
#11
bogami
O short on this radiator is very capable also fen. 2x Fury X will not be long but will need at least 3 x 8 power inputs. this liquid cooling consumes a lot more, I think. TPD will be unfortunately high. Regardless, I think that this will be my next choice.
Posted on Reply
#12
damric
ZoneDymo said:
Love it, love the fan, love the little box that makes the fan and radiator seem one item, love the sleeved tubes for the water, love the cards look.

Now I just need it to preform properly :)
I agree. This does look fantastic.
Posted on Reply
#13
RejZoR
Who cares how many watts, it's water cooled. It's not like you're running this thing 24/7 anyway, besides, who buys this sort of stuff doesn't give a flying f about power consumption.
Posted on Reply
#14
lZKoce
For a serial production item, they really went the line: sleeving, design and all. Looks like a great card hands down.

Edit: I want to see it disassembled. How did they cool the VRMs? May be some sort of modified AIO that covers them as well? Or a fan below the dotted top?
Posted on Reply
#15
BiggieShady
RejZoR said:
Who cares how many watts, it's water cooled. It's not like you're running this thing 24/7 anyway, besides, who buys this sort of stuff doesn't give a flying f about power consumption.
I don't think people care about power consumption, rather overclocking headroom
Posted on Reply
#16
GreiverBlade
damn it almost tempt me ... but the AIO is a set off :D but i would gladly put one of those with a custom block in place of my actual 290
that one or a 390X ... if the 390X has a more standard size ... hell i don't have a itx case.

short card are cute and all and fit well in itx mATX cases but ...

judging by the length of my card backplate the fury should be the same size as the 1st part before the grove for the heatpipe (bracket to grove) well maybe a bit longer since the grove is right on the end of the PCIeX connector...

remove the back part (grove to back) and ... eurghh i don't even want to think of it ...
Posted on Reply
#17
arbiter
newtekie1 said:
Two 8-Pins? So we can expect the power draw to surpass the 300w mark.
jigar2speed said:
Yap but its still just 50 Watts up from TITAN X...
newtekie1 said:
Assuming it only hits 300w, with 2 8-pins AMD has 375w to play with.
I guess its worth pointing out that r9 295x2 had 2x8pin as well and that card could draw as 600watts at max so It would be safe bet say that 300watts probably tad low for the card. So 150watt spec for 8pin kinda goes out the window IMO when said company has used almost 2x the spec on a recent card.
Posted on Reply
#18
the54thvoid
RejZoR said:
Who cares how many watts, it's water cooled. It's not like you're running this thing 24/7 anyway, besides, who buys this sort of stuff doesn't give a flying f about power consumption.
But some of us do. What is relevant though is that if it pulls 350 watts but gives 295x performance, then that is a win. It's perf/wattage that matters. I can now get rid of my sli 780ti's and replace with a single one of these (or 980ti). Some people do care about power usage beyond $$ reasons as well, such as environmental responsibility. Given we're all selfish anyway, it'd be better to have our awesome PC's consuming a little less power.

Truly excited to read reviews real soon.
Posted on Reply
#19
Joss
To use an AIO on a reference card means it heats too much.
To use one as thick as this means it heats like hell.
And this comes right after Nvidia took heat and consumption by the horns with the results we know.

If this GPU doesn't perform very, very well and is cheaper than the direct alternative, then AMD is screwed because the rest of the new cards are nothing but re-brands.


Oh... and there's the drivers conundrum as well.
Posted on Reply
#20
RejZoR
Joss said:
To use an AIO on a reference card means it heats too much.
To use one as thick as this means it heats like hell.
And this comes right after Nvidia took heat and consumption by the horns with the results we know.

If this GPU doesn't perform very, very well and is cheaper than the direct alternative, then AMD is screwed because the rest of the new cards are nothing but re-brands.


Oh... and there's the drivers conundrum as well.
It's a premium product, it comes with premium cooling. If even AiO will be on the edge, then it'll be too hot indeed. But if it will be able to run at reasonably low fan speeds, then it's a big plus, because it'll be quieter than any NVIDIA card while performing with excellence. I mean, just look at the specs of that monster...

As for the "drivers conundrum", has anyone had any serious problems with a single card? I haven't. But I admit CrossfireX isn't the best. Then again no multicard setup ever was, so there's that...
Posted on Reply
#21
the54thvoid
RejZoR said:
It's a premium product, it comes with premium cooling. If even AiO will be on the edge, then it'll be too hot indeed. But if it will be able to run at reasonably low fan speeds, then it's a big plus, because it'll be quieter than any NVIDIA card while performing with excellence. I mean, just look at the specs of that monster...

As for the "drivers conundrum", has anyone had any serious problems with a single card? I haven't. But I admit CrossfireX isn't the best. Then again no multicard setup ever was, so there's that...
Yes, exactly this -apart from quieter than any Nvidia card - a few 980ti's are sold with blocks and EVGA do a hybrid water cooled one https://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=GX-283-EA&groupid=701&catid=1914&subcat=1402

The fact is, the 290X was slated at launch for it's noise and heat issues (throttling etc). AMD listened and have looked realistically at how to bring out a top end card without flaws. I think they should be applauded for having the balls to do things this way. This will be competing with NV's top end (just don't know which way it'll go yet) and this time they've created a pretty sterling looking package.
Posted on Reply
#22
HumanSmoke
Joss said:
If this GPU doesn't perform very, very well and is cheaper than the direct alternative, then AMD is screwed because the rest of the new cards are nothing but re-brands.
It should perform well enough. There is enough headroom with input power for AMD to dial in ( up to a point) the performance they need. Having said that, recent history tends to indicate that " winning" will be on a case-by-case, title-by-title basis. I could well see the Fury X and 980 Ti split benchmarks, so it will probably depend upon overclocking headroom as a decider. By the time the Fury X makes the site reviews, I'm guessing there will also be a whole range of custom vendor 980 Ti's hitting the review circuit.
Joss said:
To use an AIO on a reference card means it heats too much.
Well, I'm sure they didn't add it because the company is so flush with cash, that they thought they'd give consumers an early Christmas present.
Joss said:
And this comes right after Nvidia took heat and consumption by the horns with the results we know.
That came at a cost of stripping out a lot of compute functionality. Double precision took a hit, the register file size is no bigger than GK110 (and half that of the reworked GK210), and the L1 memory cache is slightly reduced as well. Now, if the Fury X also has a crippled double precision from the Radeon Hawaii's 1/8th rate, some questions then have to be answered - especially if the Fiji GPU turns out to be a doubled in size Tonga ( which has a native FP64 rate of 1/16)
Joss said:
Oh... and there's the drivers conundrum as well.
Well, the card has been supposedly done for around six months, so I don't think that should be an issue - although launching flagship cards with immature drivers isn't an unknown occurrence.
Posted on Reply
#23
Luka KLLP
That is a really good looking card
Posted on Reply
#24
BiggieShady
HumanSmoke said:
That came at a cost of stripping out a lot of compute functionality. Double precision took a hit, the register file size is no bigger than GK110 (and half that of the reworked GK210), and the L1 memory cache is slightly reduced as well.
I'd say cutting out special double precision cuda cores was a worthwhile trade off when you consider for what gpu compute is used and how much overall they gained with simplified instruction scheduling. Furthermore cache system got entire another level with maxwell as opposed to kepler/fermi, so I'm not surprised level 1 cache size was adjusted. Same goes for register file size, I think all these changes were for the better even for compute - after all, these GPUs work in clusters for compute applications
HumanSmoke said:
Now, if the Fury X also has a crippled double precision from the Radeon Hawaii's 1/8th rate, some questions then have to be answered - especially if the Fiji GPU turns out to be a doubled in size Tonga ( which has a native FP64 rate of 1/16)
You may be onto something since Tonga is GCN 1.2
Posted on Reply
#25
Aquinus
Resident Wat-man
I don't know. I'm on the fence. The issue I'm having now with my 6870s isn't that there is a lack of GPU power but that there is not enough video memory. Fury (X) might be good, but the real question remains, will 4GB limit it for multi-GPU setups going forward down the line? If the 980 Ti and Fury X are on par, there might be a slight incentive to go with the 980 Ti because of the 6GB.

Once again, this is all more speculation on top of what has already been said. I suspect reviews will put the matter to rest once it comes out.

Side note: That's a damn small card.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment