Friday, July 10th 2015

AMD Announces the Radeon R9 Fury Graphics Card

by
btarunr
 Discuss (56 Comments)
AMD announced the second graphics card based on its swanky new "Fiji" silicon, the Radeon R9 Fury. Positioned between the R9 390X and the R9 Fury X, this card offers higher pixel-crunching muscle than the R9 390X, while giving you cutting-edge 4 GB HBM memory. It can play any game at 2560 x 1440, and at Ultra HD (3840 x 2160), with reasonable eye-candy. The R9 Fury is designed solely for AMD's AIB partners to come up with their own air-cooled products.

AMD carved the R9 Fury out of the Fiji silicon, by enabling 56 of the 64 GCN compute units physically present, yielding 3,584 stream processors. Other specifications include 224 TMUs, 64 ROPs, and 4 GB of memory across a 4096-bit wide HBM interface. The core is clocked at 1000 MHz, and the memory at 500 MHz (512 GB/s). Custom-design boards will offer factory-overclocked speeds. AMD is pricing the R9 Fury at US $549.

Related News

Add your own comment

56 Comments on AMD Announces the Radeon R9 Fury Graphics Card

#26
peche
Thermaltake fanboy
W1zzardASUS card arrived!
picssssssssssssss
Posted on Reply
#28
Frick
Fishfaced Nincompoop
newtekie1Slower than Fury. It just has a fancy mITX form factor. Not sure why everyone is excited about that though...
It's supposed to be faster than the 290x while using heaps less power. It's the power thing that is interesting.
Posted on Reply
#29
peche
Thermaltake fanboy
W1zzard
moaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaar
Posted on Reply
#31
Keullo-e
S.T.A.R.S.
EpicShweetnessIts supposed to best the R9 290X with a substantial power reduction, I'm guessing their going to do this by cutting down the Fiji Core even more down to about 48CU (3072 cores) or 44CU (2816 cores) to match the 290x since their cores (GCN) are the same. Clock speeds and anything else is anyone else's guess, but I'd say the HBM is going to stay there.
Is that so? What I've read Nano should have full 4096 shader chip, but it's my bad if I am wrong.
Posted on Reply
#32
newtekie1
Semi-Retired Folder
W1zzard
FrickIt's supposed to be faster than the 290x while using heaps less power. It's the power thing that is interesting.
Sure, but it is still likely to consume heaps more power than the nVidia equivalent. So it really isn't that interesting, IMO.
9700 ProIs that so? What I've read Nano should have full 4096 shader chip, but it's my bad if I am wrong.
No way that would even be possible.
Posted on Reply
#33
Keullo-e
S.T.A.R.S.
newtekie1No way that would even be possible.
Why not? Cherry-picked chip with low leakage, underclocked and -volted? I find that not impossible, since it's coming with a single 8pin connector, so it's up for 225 Watts.
Posted on Reply
#34
newtekie1
Semi-Retired Folder
9700 ProWhy not? Cherry-picked chip with low leakage, underclocked and -volted? I find that not impossible, since it's coming with a single 8pin connector, so it's up for 225 Watts.
Because look at what is needed to cool an already cut down Fiji. 3-Fan, triple slot coolers. There is no way you can get a full Fiji under a single fan small mITX size cooler, it just isn't possible. And if they want to sell them in any kind of quantity, they can't rely on simple the best cherry picked chips. They could use the better binned ones and undervolt/clock the crap out of them, but even then I doubt they'd get the power consumption/heat output low enough for the cooler to keep it cool. They have to find a way to cut power consumption down a good 100w to make the cooler work, there is just no way, even with the best cherry picked chips.
Posted on Reply
#35
LightningJR
Sorry 9700 Pro but what you are suggesting will not happen. AMD wont make the Nano from a full 4096 GPU, especially if it's a cherry picked one. The Nano will be priced lower than a Fury X and AMD wont sell their best Fury X chips at a lower price.. Not going to happen... period..

If anything would happen is a Fury XT as cherry picked Fury X chips with a higher clocked core at higher price and there's no reason to think that'll happen either.
Posted on Reply
#36
flynnski
TheLostSwedeTwo DVI ports, really?
Can we please drop DVI ports on graphics cards already?

The Asus card (posted below in the news section) does appear to have three DisplayPort connectors which is good news.

Also, why would AMD be going backwards, they were way ahead of Nvidia when it came to adding DisplayPort connectors to their cards and now we're getting more DVI all ports all of a sudden, huh??
As noted previously, supplied picture is place holder. The Asus Fury Strx has a single DL-DVI as Asus is using a totally custom PCB. Asus, or anyone else could in fact add hdmi 2.0 if they so desired.
Posted on Reply
#37
haswrong
itd be best to display not a generic g-card, but maybe a pic of the relevant gpu inside.. the generic pic of a g-card tends to confuse the broad crowd..
Posted on Reply
#41
GhostRyder
newtekie1Because look at what is needed to cool an already cut down Fiji. 3-Fan, triple slot coolers. There is no way you can get a full Fiji under a single fan small mITX size cooler, it just isn't possible. And if they want to sell them in any kind of quantity, they can't rely on simple the best cherry picked chips. They could use the better binned ones and undervolt/clock the crap out of them, but even then I doubt they'd get the power consumption/heat output low enough for the cooler to keep it cool. They have to find a way to cut power consumption down a good 100w to make the cooler work, there is just no way, even with the best cherry picked chips.
Dude, that Asus 3 fan Strix cooler is not a 3 slot cooler. They also have both 3 slot and dual slot coolers...Also this card uses pretty low wattage compared to the last generation from AMD and the temps are very reasonable including in the no-fan mode.

If were strictly talking about the Nano, they already said (I believe) it was supposed to compete against the GTX 970 in terms of performance. So likely it will be a new Fiji based chip fully unlocked with significantly less stream processors. That is probably what it is going to be based on the limited information available.
Posted on Reply
#42
newtekie1
Semi-Retired Folder
GhostRyderDude, that Asus 3 fan Strix cooler is not a 3 slot cooler. They also have both 3 slot and dual slot coolers...Also this card uses pretty low wattage compared to the last generation from AMD and the temps are very reasonable including in the no-fan mode.
Yes, but it is a 3-fan cooler, see how that comma works? Grammar, it is wonderful!
GhostRyderIf were strictly talking about the Nano, they already said (I believe) it was supposed to compete against the GTX 970 in terms of performance. So likely it will be a new Fiji based chip fully unlocked with significantly less stream processors. That is probably what it is going to be based on the limited information available.
Nope. They wouldn't bother to run a special batch just for the Nano, and if they did it would no longer be called Fiji it would be a different GPU. Nano will be a cut down Fiji, period. There is no chance it will be a full Fiji with just lowered clocks, there is no way they could do that, or would for that matter.
Posted on Reply
#43
GhostRyder
newtekie1Yes, but it is a 3-fan cooler, see how that comma works? Grammar, it is wonderful!
I am not going to get into a grammatical argument over that lol. Either way though gigabyte has a 2 fan dual slot cooler plus how often does xfx do it. Both of those coolers are likely to as well be dual fan dual slot coolers.
newtekie1Nope. They wouldn't bother to run a special batch just for the Nano, and if they did it would no longer be called Fiji it would be a different GPU. Nano will be a cut down Fiji, period. There is no chance it will be a full Fiji with just lowered clocks, there is no way they could do that, or would for that matter.
. Probably phrased that wrong (or did not put enough information in). It's likely to be a cut down further or new chip more than the full Fiji. I mostly meant they could release a new "Fiji based" card (err gcn 1.2 or whatever). We will probably find out in the near future either way.
Posted on Reply
#44
newtekie1
Semi-Retired Folder
GhostRyderI am not going to get into a grammatical argument over that lol. Either way though gigabyte has a 2 fan dual slot cooler plus how often does xfx do it. Both of those coolers are likely to as well be dual fan dual slot coolers.
Where is these magical Gigabyte and XFX Fury cards with a dual-fan 2-slot cooler? Did you see the big ass cooler on the Strix Fury? Did you see how the card was still hitting 70°C? And even with the 3 huge fans and 70°C load temps it was still hitting 40dbA, as loud as a reference Titan X? And that is a cut down Fiji already.

There is no way possible they are going to manage a single fan miniITX design with a full Fiji, it just isn't going to happen, unless the made the thing a freakin' jet engine, and then that completely defeats the purpose doesn't it?
GhostRyder. Probably phrased that wrong (or did not put enough information in). It's likely to be a cut down further or new chip more than the full Fiji. I mostly meant they could release a new "Fiji based" card (err gcn 1.2 or whatever). We will probably find out in the near future either way.
It won't be a new chip, just a even more cut down Fiji. That is my point from the beginning, not sure why you argued with it if you think they'll just use a cut down Fiji too.
Posted on Reply
#45
GhostRyder
newtekie1Where is these magical Gigabyte and XFX Fury cards with a dual-fan 2-slot cooler? Did you see the big ass cooler on the Strix Fury? Did you see how the card was still hitting 70°C? And even with the 3 huge fans and 70°C load temps it was still hitting 40dbA, as loud as a reference Titan X? And that is a cut down Fiji already.
On the 390x which uses the same power roughly.

It also hit 68, that's not very hot especially looking across the board. Plus it's power consumption is not bad looking across the board so I can see more dual fan variants soon enough.
newtekie1There is no way possible they are going to manage a single fan miniITX design with a full Fiji, it just isn't going to happen, unless the made the thing a freakin' jet engine, and then that completely defeats the purpose doesn't it?
eh, probably not unless it's a blower or they do some odd design ...
newtekie1It won't be a new chip, just a even more cut down Fiji. That is my point from the beginning, not sure why you argued with it if you think they'll just use a cut down Fiji too.
I didn't I was just adding not arguing (or not intending to).
Posted on Reply
#46
fullinfusion
Vanguard Beta Tester
A question, Why is AMD charging such a high price for these cards?

Here where I live, it's an $800 dollar card after tax :confused:

Id love a FuryX but not for $850 :(
Posted on Reply
#47
newtekie1
Semi-Retired Folder
GhostRyderOn the 390x which uses the same power roughly.

It also hit 68, that's not very hot especially looking across the board. Plus it's power consumption is not bad looking across the board so I can see more dual fan variants soon enough.
Yes, but you can't directly compare these cards because the heat load being applied to the coolers differently between the 390X and Fury. The coolers on Fury cards are now directly responsible for cooling the HBM memory. On the 390X the heat from the memory isn't being put into the cooler, the memory is indirectly cooled by the airflow. With the Fury cards the heat from the memory is being directly cooled by the heatsink, and that memory actually is responsible for a pretty large amount of heat. That is why the air coolers on the Fury cards have to be bigger even though the power consumption is lower.
Posted on Reply
#48
buildzoid
newtekie1Yes, but you can't directly compare these cards because the heat load being applied to the coolers differently between the 390X and Fury. The coolers on Fury cards are now directly responsible for cooling the HBM memory. On the 390X the heat from the memory isn't being put into the cooler, the memory is indirectly cooled by the airflow. With the Fury cards the heat from the memory is being directly cooled by the heatsink, and that memory actually is responsible for a pretty large amount of heat. That is why the air coolers on the Fury cards have to be bigger even though the power consumption is lower.
Most 390X cards have a baseplate that is part of the main finstack above the core which cools the VRAM.
Posted on Reply
#49
the54thvoid
Intoxicated Moderator
fullinfusionA question, Why is AMD charging such a high price for these cards?

Here where I live, it's an $800 dollar card after tax :confused:

Id love a FuryX but not for $850 :(
They're not going to be cheap to manufacture. HBM is too new to be cost effective. The Fiji chip itself is like Kepler to Maxwell, a move from Hawaii with a few differences. But integrating the on chip memory with an interposer layer creates costs not associated with tried and tested GDDR5.
People expect far too much charity from a privately owned, profit driven (shareholder) company. The notion AMD are the consumer friends only comes from playing second fiddle to Intel and up until 290x, clearly second fiddle to Nvidia. Now they can arguably claim performance equality with Nvidia on stock levels, so they have no justification to go 'cheap'. In fact, their shareholders wouldn't be happy if they quickly slashed prices on Fiji.
Posted on Reply
#50
newtekie1
Semi-Retired Folder
buildzoidMost 390X cards have a baseplate that is part of the main finstack above the core which cools the VRAM.
None that I've seen. They have a baseplate that cools the VRAM, but I haven't seen one that is integrated into the main heatsink.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment
Apr 19th, 2024 17:45 EDT change timezone

Latest GPU Drivers

New Forum Posts

Popular Reviews

Controversial News Posts