Monday, July 6th 2015

ASUS Readies Radeon R9 Fury STRIX with DirectCU III Cooler

ASUS is reportedly giving final touches to an air-cooled Radeon R9 Fury (that's Fury without the "X") graphics card, based on its new-generation STRIX cooling solution. Listings of the card appeared online, with German retailer Computer PC Shop asking 623.90€ (including VAT) for it. If you remove the 19% VAT, you arrive at a price-tag of around 500€. This card is known to feature ASUS' DirectCU III triple-fan cooling solution, which made its debut with the R9 390X and GTX 980 Ti STRIX graphics cards. As for the SKU itself, the specs of the R9 Fury remain a mystery. AMD could lower the clocks, reduce the stream processor count, or a combination or the two. It still features 4 GB of HBM. Evidently, AMD allows its AIB partners to come up with custom-design boards for this SKU, which means a reference-design board is unlikely.
Source: Eteknix
Add your own comment

33 Comments on ASUS Readies Radeon R9 Fury STRIX with DirectCU III Cooler

#1
Caring1
A triple fan set up on a small card like the Fury?
Are they using 5cm fans?
Posted on Reply
#2
happita
Of course it's going to have some variation of some sort whether it be the stream processor count or what have you. I'm thinking the non-X is going to sit between the 980 and the Fury-X/980ti. Could be an interesting option if the AIB cooling solutions keep the card cool.
Posted on Reply
#3
btarunr
Editor & Senior Moderator
Caring1, post: 3310553, member: 153156"
A triple fan set up on a small card like the Fury?
Are they using 5cm fans?
Like size of the PCB ever mattered. Here's a GTX 670 from 3 years ago.





Unless they make their own long PCBs, expect custom-design R9 Fury to look something like that.
Posted on Reply
#5
rooivalk
unlikely, but something like this exists

Posted on Reply
#6
micropage7
interesting, how far asus could manage the cooler on this card
Posted on Reply
#8
micropage7
btarunr, post: 3310571, member: 43587"
The model name itself has "DC3" which means DirectCU III. The "III" denotes three fans.
really? i think that its the 3rd version of direct CU, not only the fan but using different cooling configuration
Posted on Reply
#9
btarunr
Editor & Senior Moderator
micropage7, post: 3310573, member: 82848"
really? i think that its the 3rd version of direct CU, not only the fan but using different cooling configuration
Nope. The number next to "DirectCU" denotes fan count, not generation.
Posted on Reply
#10
RejZoR
It'll probably utilize same DirectCU cooler as found on Strix GTX 980Ti.
Posted on Reply
#11
HumanSmoke
RejZoR, post: 3310583, member: 1515"
It'll probably utilize same DirectCU cooler as found on Strix GTX 980Ti.
Probably. The GPU+HBM interposer looks tailor-made for the large heatpipe base footprint of the cooler
Posted on Reply
#12
RejZoR
Yeah, the contact makes little sense on tiny GPU's where 50% of the surface is never even contacting GPU. But with HBM, you can make those memory modules touching it as well.
Posted on Reply
#13
Xzibit
I hate U-pipe coolers on GPUs. Especially if half the pipe is outside of the fan air flow like on certain cooler.
Posted on Reply
#14
GhostRyder
So custom coolers at launch and no reference, well that should be a nice change of pace from the usual. I wonder if we will see some non-reference PCB's as well!
Posted on Reply
#15
buggalugs
AMD would be crazy to have only the watercooled option for the furyX. I cant believe they wont release non-reference versions eventually.
Posted on Reply
#16
happita
buggalugs, post: 3310762, member: 56431"
AMD would be crazy to have only the watercooled option for the furyX. I cant believe they wont release non-reference versions eventually.
This is actually the non-x version. I dont think we'll see any air cooled furyx cards.
Posted on Reply
#17
Casecutter

[INDENT][INDENT][/INDENT][/INDENT]

Didn’t necessarily to perfectly scale and line up stuff, but the 4 mounting points of the interposer appear spread further apart than that cooler shown. Not to say they couldn't make some changes or adapter, but it doesn’t appear to be a simple bolt on.
Posted on Reply
#18
HumanSmoke
Casecutter, post: 3310811, member: 94772"
Didn’t necessarily to perfectly scale and line up stuff, but the 4 mounting points of the interposer appear spread further apart than that cooler shown. Not to say they couldn't make some changes or adapter, but it doesn’t appear to be a simple bolt on.
I'm guessing you don't disassemble many graphics cards.
The spacing of the mounting holes between cards using the same cooler on both vendors cards has differed for generations. Currently the spacing for Hawaii/Pitcairn/Tonga is 53.2mm, while GM 200/204/GK 110/104/GF 100/110 is 58.4mm. It is a relatively simple matter to machine a hold-down adapter (and placement of heatsink plates for power phases) for using the same cooler with both vendors.
Posted on Reply
#19
newtekie1
Semi-Retired Folder
RejZoR, post: 3310623, member: 1515"
Yeah, the contact makes little sense on tiny GPU's where 50% of the surface is never even contacting GPU. But with HBM, you can make those memory modules touching it as well.
All the heatpipes don't need to touch the GPU to be effective. The heat will travel between the ends of the heatpipes, so it will go from the hotter pipes to the cooler ones.

Xzibit, post: 3310642, member: 105152"
I hate U-pipe coolers on GPUs. Especially if half the pipe is outside of the fan air flow like on certain cooler.
The heatpipes don't need to be in the airflow, the air flowing over the heatpipe isn't want is cooling the card. The heatpipe is used to quickly move heat from a hot area to a cool area. So the heat flows into the heatpipe, the heatpipe then move the heat away from the GPU into the fins of the heatsink, and then the airflow cools the fins of the heatsink. There isn't nearly enough surface area on the heatpipe for it to make any difference in cooling capacity of the cooler.
Posted on Reply
#20
Casecutter
HumanSmoke, post: 3310934, member: 98425"
It is a relatively simple matter to machine a hold-down adapter (and placement of heatsink plates for power phases) for using the same cooler with both vendors.
You might what to look at that again... I thought the interposer package is more like 100mm square, while those holes on Fury look more than that, so they'll need to do more then simply to machine a hold-down adapter a little.

Compare the holes of the MSI 980Ti (the black ones's) to Fury in relation to the PCI slot. not in the small ballpark.


[INDENT][INDENT][INDENT][INDENT][INDENT][INDENT] [/INDENT][/INDENT][/INDENT][/INDENT][/INDENT][/INDENT]
Posted on Reply
#21
HumanSmoke
Casecutter, post: 3310971, member: 94772"
You might what to look at that again... I thought the interposer package is more like 100mm square, while those holes on Fury look more than that, so they'll need to do more then simply to machine a hold-down adapter a little.

Compare the holes of the MSI 980Ti (the black ones's) to Fury in relation to the PCI slot. not in the small ballpark.
Oh, ffs, give it up already. Adding different hold down brackets isn't rocket science. Companies have been making variants for common coolers for at least a dozen years. Gainward and many other AIB's for example, used the same basic cooler for both the FX 5700U as well as the FX 5700. The former uses a 38mm spacing, the latter, 55mm - over 100% larger in area.
If people like me, with only a light engineering background, can draw up and CNC a custom plate for watercooling in a morning, I'm guessing that the resources of an AIB aren't going to be particularly taxed doing something similar. How you regard designing and machining a cold plate hold-down as some technological feat is beyond me when waterblock makers such as EK, Swiftech, AC, XSPC, Koolance release larger pieces with more intricate relief and raised moulding with virtually every AIB custom graphics card.
Posted on Reply
#22
RejZoR
newtekie1, post: 3310939, member: 20670"
All the heatpipes don't need to touch the GPU to be effective. The heat will travel between the ends of the heatpipes, so it will go from the hotter pipes to the cooler ones.



The heatpipes don't need to be in the airflow, the air flowing over the heatpipe isn't want is cooling the card. The heatpipe is used to quickly move heat from a hot area to a cool are. So the heat flows into the heatpipe, the heatpipe then move the heat away from the GPU into the fins of the heatsink, and then the airflow cools the fins of the heatsink. There isn't nearly enough surface area on the heatpipe for it to make any difference in cooling capacity of the cooler.
This simply isn't true. Anyone who is a serious overclocker and deals with large amounts of heat knows that it doesn't work like that. There is basically no contact between heatpipes, meaning the heat has to go through the heatpipe, through the heatsink base and back to another heatpipe outside the GPU contact area. If you have to go through so many hoops, it simply isn't effective. Which is why they use larger heatpipes on the actual contacting area...
Posted on Reply
#23
Casecutter
HumanSmoke, post: 3311004, member: 98425"
Oh, ffs, give it up already. Adding different hold down brackets isn't rocket science.
No because I'm hoping ASUS doesn't take all that nonchalantly. You can add all the hyperbolizing you what but... It's not just adding "hold down bracket", it means a new block (larger bolt spacing) that the pipes then need to be swedged into. Sure I'm not saying it can't be done, the problem I see is with HBM module are small, so for a heat-pipe to work excellent they have to be perfectly placed over the center of a heat pipe (right on top of the module), to do it right. I can't see them having a gap straddling an HBM module (in such case that would be at least two modules) at best the pipes might be reused. Now unless those modules as to heat aren't all that worrisome, but as of yet I have heard either way. Lastly the cooler fins probably won't work as they need to be stamp in a pattern that provides a larger opening for the block. So sure it a cooler perhaps something like that.

I suppose we hold to the... wait and see.
Posted on Reply
#24
CKBRYANT
Casecutter, post: 3311041, member: 94772"
No because I'm hoping ASUS doesn't take all that nonchalantly. You can add all the hyperbolizing you what but... It's not just adding "hold down bracket", it means a new block (larger bolt spacing) that the pipes then need to be swedged into. Sure I'm not saying it can't be done, the problem I see is with HBM module are small, so for a heat-pipe to work excellent they have to be perfectly placed over the center of a heat pipe (right on top of the module), to do it right. I can't see them having a gap straddling an HBM module (in such case that would be at least two modules) at best the pipes might be reused. Now unless those modules as to heat aren't all that worrisome, but as of yet I have heard either way. Lastly the cooler fins probably won't work as they need to be stamp in a pattern that provides a larger opening for the block. So sure it a cooler perhaps something like that.

I suppose we hold to the... wait and see.
from what I read on several places, and even in forums of semiaccurate that this is the same cooler used on the non-x version of the fury. Usually semiaccurate isn't full of bs like some places. Also the PowerColor Devil 13 picture was on semiaccurate which will be used for the dual Fury card based on the surface area/ water cooler plate.
Posted on Reply
#25
HumanSmoke
Casecutter, post: 3311041, member: 94772"
No because I'm hoping ASUS doesn't take all that nonchalantly. You can add all the hyperbolizing you what but... It's not just adding "hold down bracket"
Right, because Asus aren't able to make a bracket to the tolerances required (or to use a full cold plate/support bracket), yet TSMC mass produces the same bracket for every AMD GPU. So either TSMC are geniuses, or AIB's are dumb as a short bus full of redneck zombies.
Casecutter, post: 3311041, member: 94772"
the problem I see is with HBM module are small, so for a heat-pipe to work excellent they have to be perfectly placed over the center of a heat pipe (right on top of the module), to do it right. I can't see them having a gap straddling an HBM module (in such case that would be at least two modules) at best the pipes might be reused. Now unless those modules as to heat aren't all that worrisome, but as of yet I have heard either way. Lastly the cooler fins probably won't work as they need to be stamp in a pattern that provides a larger opening for the block. So sure it a cooler perhaps something like that.
HBM is just stacked DRAM running at 1.2V using 3.3 watts per stack....



....so just how much heat are you expecting HBM to generate considering many 7Gbps GDDR5 equipped cards using 1.55V generating twice (or more) the amount of heat frequently receive no cooling whatsoever?
CKBRYANT, post: 3311074, member: 158477"
from what I read on several places, and even in forums of semiaccurate that this is the same cooler used on the non-x version of the fury. Usually semiaccurate isn't full of bs like some places. Also the PowerColor Devil 13 picture was on semiaccurate which will be used for the dual Fury card based on the surface area/ water cooler plate.
I would think that the cold plate is a logical choice, if only to negate the chance of breaking the silicon during assembly. The plate is little more than a copper plate with a support edge to maintain rigidity - basically the same as the Fury X, without the need for machine screws that seal the lower and upper halves of the water chamber
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment