Computex 2015: AMD "Fiji" finally makes a public debut.

http://videocardz.com/56050/amd-fiji-officially-shown-at-computex-2015

http://wccftech.com/amd-officially-...hbm-confirmed-radeon-fury-launches-16th-june/



June 16th at E3 is when we'll see the performance offered by Fiji.

In my opinion, Computex was a bit disappointing. Perhaps it was because of all the hype we created for AMD and new GPU technology, which lead to higher expectations. Anyway, what did you think of Computex? Are you excited for "Fiji?"

 

Yeah, better wait for E3. Nothing to see here. Same old news.

 

AMD has an official page regarding E3 announcement

In the meantime, enjoy some nerd pr0n

 

Can't, need to see those benches first...

 

Screw 970, I'm gonna get one of those!

 

Price : Performance

GG m8

 

[QUOTE="DataShell, post: 10020476, member: 607081 [/QUOTE]
I'll take 5! Is there a way to run 5 way Crossfire?

 

I'm just going to drop this here and run.

 

Meh, all we care about now is Radeon Fury. Not sure what Hawaii is doing inside a Fiji thread.

 

I don't see how AMD is going to pull off 390X as a 290X rebrand unless they're going to have it priced at the 400 mark and leave a gap until the 800+ for the Fury. I guess they could leave the 295x2 in the middle...

 

There's something like 4-5 Fiji SKUs per the latest rumor, so that gap will be filled

http://www.dsogaming.com/news/rumou...come-with-both-4gb-8gb-cheapest-model-at-599/

 

Lowest at 599? AMD is dead in the water.

 

Not if it's competitive with 980 Ti

 

That's a pretty big if there.

 

"AMD is dead in the water" is a pretty big reach

 

So is the lowest Fiji coming close to the 980 Ti. Highly doubt they'd release an x2 unless that's the only way they can actually gain high ground over nvidia.

 

Do you know something the rest of us don't?

 

http://wccftech.com/amd-radeon-r9-fury-fiji-xt-gpu-slower-gtx-980-ti/

They sure are pulling awfully close to release with a product that still needs optimization.

 

Read the updates. That's just how AMD cards are, and why I'm still getting good performance boosts on my essentially 3+ year old 7950 from recent drivers while Nvidia has dropped Kepler faster than a hot potato.

 

When I buy something, I expect it to have the performance it promised out of the box. I don't care about optimization down the road. AMD needs to knock this out of the park or they are in trouble at the prices they are demanding.

 

You're mixing up promises (there are none) with personal expectations, which has nothing to do with what I said. I said AMD cards improve more over time than Nvidia cards.

 

Which is totally irrelevant to someone looking at a 650 dollar 980 Ti benchmark and seeing a 600 dollar AMD card that consumes more power and doesn't match the 980 Ti stock. Then they see the 980 Ti overclocked and only die hard team red can justify saving the 50 bucks on inferior hardware with 2GB less RAM to boot.

 

1. We don't know performance and pricing, everything is fluid at this point
2. You sound like an Nvidia fanboy

 

1) AMD has already admitted that they need to optimize the card so we do have a bit of an expectation when it comes to performance.

2) Right, that's why I have been hoping for AMD to come out with something that forces nvidia to shape up. I am not seeing what I wanted to see and that is worrying. Also remember the forum rules about name calling, you know very well that calling somebody a fanboy is against the rules.

 

Sorry. What I meant was you sound irrationally harsh on AMD. Maybe AMD finally realized that selling faster GPUs at lower prices than Nvidia wasn't improving its market share, just making it bleed money, so it's giving up on that strategy. Which is probably the right move. And first-gen HBM can't be cheap either.

 

Can you blame me for being harsh on AMD? Look what they did in the mobile sector and the only way they could compete with nvidia on the desktop was with the 295x2 that had incredible power demands and even exceeded the specifications for PCIe power draw to pull it off. It is scary how dominant nvidia has become and if AMD doesn't bring the competition, they are really going to hurt. I said earlier in this thread that if AMD beats nvidia at a competitive price, I'd replace my 780 Ti with an AMD flagship but if they can't get it together, I'm going to get the 980 Ti and I won't be alone.

 

You said this? All I see in this thread is you crapping on AMD like you'd already made up your mind on their failure with Fiji.

 

Wasn't this thread, was another AMD thread. We get so many of threads all over the board its hard to keep track. But yes I am disappointed by Fiji right now. That doesn't mean I've lost all hope though. I have the money for a 980 Ti right now but I'm waiting anyway to see what plays out.

 

Oh good lord.

I've been following all the Fiji rumors and let me just say this right now. The part about Fiji XT not even matching 980 Ti and AMD still tweaking performance makes ZERO sense. Why? Fiji XT is supposed to be AMD's ace and edge out the Titan X (even if just at 4K). Titan X was released in mid-March, so AMD knows full well how it performs. Unless you're telling me AMD is so incompetent they just sat on their asses for 2.5 months straight, this whole rumor is just BS, because if Fiji XT beats Titan X, it beats 980 Ti by default period.

Now Fiji will definitely have one or several cut down variants (no way you're going to make a 570mm² chip and not have imperfect dies). What I suspect is happening, is that AMD expected the 980 Ti to be 7-10% slower than Titan X like the 780 was vs the original Titan. So 980 Ti being 3% slower than Titan X and its aggressive pricing was a surprise. So where the rumors got it wrong is that it's not the full Fiji that can't even match 980 Ti, it's the cut down one. This falls in line with AMD still tweaking performance of the cut down chip that was originally intended to compete with 980 Ti. Really all they need is an extra 5% performance and they're there, assuming they went with the more conservative 7% slower than Titan X figure.

As far as pricing go, we have nothing but rumors. And don't give me the Sweclockers crap. Yes they were the ones to leak the $849 price, they also said 980 Ti would drop after summer and they were dead wrong. And yes I'm fully aware HardwareBattle (Korean site) claimed the price is now $899. Yeah right.

Even if those prices were considered by AMD at some point, remember that was before the 980 Ti launched at its current price. If you honestly think AMD would charge more for a card that was slower than 980 Ti and with less vram (regardless of HBM), then I don't know what to say.

Anyway that's just my take.

 

Good info @n=1

The part about 980 Ti being so close to Titan X is a bit overblown when you consider that it has a little more TDP headroom to play with, so naturally it boosts higher out of the box. Once you raise Power Target on the Titan X to bring boost clock in line with 980 Ti, then you get the expected 10% difference.

 

There's a good 25% separating the 980 from 980 Ti. If AMD is smart they ought to make a 3rd cut down Fiji (Fiji LE?) to fill the void there. Something +10% over 980 at $500 should really sell, especially when you consider it's HBM vs GDDR5 (not that most would care, but still a great marketing point). I know I'd jump at it if I was in the market for such a card.

I just hope they don't think that somehow by giving the 290X a speed boost and slapping on MOAR RAMZ and rebranding it as 390X, it would magically compete with 980, because it won't, unless it's literally half the price. Even then it's a hard sell (just look at 290X vs 970). But such a 390X could definitely compete very favorably with 970 if the price was right.

 

wait wot

 

Damn, I pick a bad time to buy a new PC...
Oh well, that's tech for you.

 

What's so special about this? I've seen 290/290X cards dip well below $300 for months. 390 Series is simply rebadges with double the VRAM. Extremely overpriced too. How can they possibly sell it at those prices when 970 matches 390X while being cheaper than 390?

 

Fiji compute performance leaked.

Here's the comparison chart, and here are Fiji's details.

It says 64 compute units (so 4096 shaders) with a max clock speed of 1GHz. Which is exactly in line with a SiSoft Sandra leak that happened over 7 months ago.



So at this point it's looking more and more likely that Fiji XT will indeed have 4096 shaders (a whooping 45.5% increase over 290X), and a 1GHz clockspeed at least for those samples. Maybe the one with the AIO will have higher clocks? Exciting times ahead.

 

Looks like the 390X is going to be $389. However, it only competes with the 970. So, nvidia is still leading the way and they're onto Pascal next...

Damn, nvidia has one hell of a head start. Hope they don't "dumb down" Pascal because of this to squeeze more money out of it.

 

Doesn't look that much superior to the 980 Ti..

https://compubench.com/compare.jsp?...aphics+Processor&D2=NVIDIA+GeForce+GTX+980+Ti

We will have to wait and see what the gaming performance turns out. The current benchmark for gaming performance doesn't look right. It shows no performance over the 290X

 

Oh yeah don't use compute performance to compare anything. I mean hell in the chart I linked a 280X beats a 290X, yet is nowhere close in gaming performance. I posted that mainly to point out the 4096 shader bit is almost confirmed at this point.

Btw if you're into more rumors...

Obviously the usual salt and what not. But not gonna lie, pretty skeptical of the 54% minimum claim. If they meant 54% maximum that would be a lot more believable, though still a bit of a stretch.

 

http://videocardz.com/56225/amd-radeon-fury-x-3dmark-performance

 

Yep saw that. Funny thing is in their own Fire Strike screenshot it shows the graphics score as 7932, yet in the charts it shows up as 7873. Guess 7932 is a bit too close to Titan X for comfort.

Original bench here btw. Also, going by that chart, Fiji XT is 56% faster than 290X at 1440p, and 51% faster at 4K, which is remarkably close to what WCCF said yesterday about "54% minimum increase over 290X".

Also, actual game performance gap is typically smaller than indicated by Fire Strike, which usually depicts a "worst case scenario" type of situation. If you don't believe me then look around at Titan X reviews and compare the Fire Strike vs actual game performance gap against 290X. If Fiji XT is breathing down Titan X's neck in Fire Strike, it will likely tie or edge out Titan X in games at 1440p or 4K, assuming no GameWorks shenanigans.

 

Let's hope they price it accordingly. Thou i think it will be pretty expensive due to the high core count and HBM memory . If they keep it around 700$ they might give Team Green some competition. Which is exactly what we need ....cause right now it's sort of one sided .

 

Well it gives people an alternative but I hope it overclocks well and stays cool. Of course if it comes in over 700 bucks its gonna have a real tough time. It looks like AMD literally is riding the edge with the 980 Ti

 

http://www.techpowerup.com/mobile/213455/comments.html

 

Any gpu that comes from a manufacturer with a AIO water solution apparently already has a heat issue.

 

Where is the interposer?

 

Why are ppl still posting crap about 390X when it's been confirmed to be a 290X rebrand for a while now? Fury is the only thing which matters at this point.

 

Fury X:
Brand new 28nm "Fiji" GPU
64 CUs (4096 SPs and 256 TMUs) and 64 ROPs @ 1050 MHz
8.6 TFLOPS
8.9B transistors
4GB 4096-bit HBM @ 512 GB/s
Liquid cooled
300W TDP
1.5x perf/watt as 290X
On sale 6/24 for $649

Fury:
Same specs as Fury X (?)
Air cooled
275W TDP
On sale 7/14 for $549

Fury Nano:
Cut down Fiji GPU (?)
SFF card (6 in. length)
Air cooled, single fan
150W TDP
2x perf/watt as 290X
Available summer

Spoiler: Fury Nano

Fury dual-GPU:
Available fall

Spoiler: Fury dual-GPU

Fury X specs from here: http://www.moorinsightsstrategy.com...e-to-Radeon-by-Moor-Insights-and-Strategy.pdf

 

The Nano, can they tune it down slightly and put it into a laptop?


And any updates on 8GB/16GB versions?