AMD's Fury and the future of the enthusiast GPU

Discussion in 'Off Topic' started by iMacmatician, Jun 17, 2015.

?

Which of the AMD products announced today are you most excited for?

  1. The R9 Fury X

    41.7%
  2. The R9 Fury

    41.7%
  3. The R9 Nano

    33.3%
  4. Project Quantum

    25.0%
  5. The R9 390/390X

    8.3%
  6. Other

    25.0%
Multiple votes are allowed.
  1. iMacmatician

    iMacmatician Member

    Messages:
    310
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    AMD has released what is possibly the most awaited graphics chip of 2015, Fiji. It has 8.9 billion transistors, which is more than any other GPU.

    The key feature of the Fiji chip is the use of High-Bandwidth Memory (HBM) instead of the GDDR5 that has been used in high-end GPUs for many years. GDDR5 memory is extremely fast, but it also uses a lot of power. The increasing bandwidth needs of faster and faster GPUs will result in too much power being spent on bandwidth if current trends are maintained. GDDR5 chips are also rather large and take up a lot of space in a graphics card. AMD has decided to solve the problem using HBM. HBM chips are stacked on top of each other and run at a comparatively low frequency (500 MHz / 1 Gbps instead of GDDR5's 1.75 GHz / 7 Gbps). The GPU and memory stacks are placed on top of a interposer, which is a piece of silicon with wires that connect chips to other chips. The interposer results in the memory being much closer to the GPU, reducing power, and also allows for much wider memory buses than what would be possible otherwise. Thus, the memory bus is 4096 bits in Fiji's implementation (4 stacks, 1024 bits per stack) and so the total memory bandwidth goes up compared to GDDR5.

    The result is that Fiji has 512 GB/s of memory bandwidth, which is more than the R9 290X (320 GB/s) and the GTX TITAN X (336 GB/s), and uses a lot less power too. These benefits don't come without costs though. The HBM and interposer are expensive to make, and the first iteration of HBM only supports a maximum of 1 GB per stack. Thus, Fiji will have "only" 4 GB of memory, which was large last year but not so much now that newer cards have 6-12 GB of memory. Even AMD's own R9 390 and R9 390X, which were also announced today, have 8 GB of memory.

    The first graphics cards based on Fiji will be under a separate name, Fury. That name may be familiar to some of the elderly folks here. Superficially, Fury seems to be AMD's version of NVIDIA's TITAN, representing parts that not only use a large chip, but are also much more powerful than existing parts. However, the Fiji chip is going to be used in a wider variety of parts than Big Kepler or Large Maxwell (I say "Large" instead of "Big" because that Maxwell part has slow double-precision) in the consumer area.

    The R9 Fury X is the most powerful single-GPU part, and like the R9 295X2, it is water cooled. The price is $649.

    [​IMG]

    I expect it to be about twice as fast as the HD 7970 GHz Edition, which would put it slightly above the 980 Ti and TITAN X. I think it's impressive how far AMD has come since the HD 7970 without any process shrinks.

    The R9 Fury (no suffix) is an air-cooled part, and while we don't have details on its configuration, I expect it to use a partially disabled Fiji. The price is $549.

    The R9 Nano is really small, only 6" in length. My graphing calculators are longer than that. This card will be available in the summer.

    [​IMG]

    And last but presumably the most powerful, a currently unnamed dual-GPU card will be present in AMD's Project Quantum, an upcoming small form factor case.

    [​IMG]

    As for the rest of the lineup, few details were given besides the names and the memory capacities, but the rumor mill expects only minor updates.

    Sources: AnandTech, AnandTech.
     
  2. McGyver

    McGyver Experimental Pedagogue

    Messages:
    6,533
    Likes Received:
    31
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Nice thread, why can't Spartacus be more like you?

    Anyways, if its true that the vanilla Fury is the same as the X, then it's a card that beats the Titan X for 550$! That's how competition should work, you see that, CPU market?
     
  3. Space_Oddity

    Space_Oddity The Shitstorm

    Messages:
    2,957
    Likes Received:
    43
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I want a card for less than £300 and I don't know what to do with any of this information.
     
  4. McGyver

    McGyver Experimental Pedagogue

    Messages:
    6,533
    Likes Received:
    31
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Well, AMD just announced some graphic cards that come with quite some revolutionary tech, but that should not concern you since I think you only play in 1080p resolution and therefore a Geforce 970 is what you want.
     
  5. Trickster

    Trickster Retired Developer

    Messages:
    16,576
    Likes Received:
    46
    Trophy Points:
    0
  6. Z100000M

    Z100000M Vithered Weteran

    Messages:
    9,120
    Likes Received:
    70
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Its a good thing her first isnt Mary.
     
  7. iMacmatician

    iMacmatician Member

    Messages:
    310
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
  8. Space_Oddity

    Space_Oddity The Shitstorm

    Messages:
    2,957
    Likes Received:
    43
    Trophy Points:
    0
    True, I'm not too fussed about massive resolutions but I am also looking to get a 144hz monitor too. Gotta get all them frames.
     
  9. McGyver

    McGyver Experimental Pedagogue

    Messages:
    6,533
    Likes Received:
    31
    Trophy Points:
    0
    If you stick with 1440p then Fury X is probably the best choice for high FPS.

    Interestingly, it beats a 980TI in 4K resolution too, even tough it has only 4GBs:

    http://i.imgur.com/BIqmOXb.png

    Those charts are from AMD nevertheless.
     
    Last edited: Jun 18, 2015
  10. McGyver

    McGyver Experimental Pedagogue

    Messages:
    6,533
    Likes Received:
    31
    Trophy Points:
    0
  11. CRITAWAKETS

    CRITAWAKETS Member

    Messages:
    236
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Great thing for AMD,but i am staying with NVIDIA due to me being restricted to budget cards and blockland runs better with NVIDIA.
     
  12. iMacmatician

    iMacmatician Member

    Messages:
    310
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    The R9 390X actually seems to be quite impressive, it's essentially equal overall to a 980 in 2160p and 1440p.

    [​IMG][​IMG]
     
  13. ImSpartacus

    ImSpartacus nerf spec plz

    Messages:
    8,598
    Likes Received:
    7
    Trophy Points:
    0
    It's good to hear that it might actually be remotely worth its price tag.
     
  14. McGyver

    McGyver Experimental Pedagogue

    Messages:
    6,533
    Likes Received:
    31
    Trophy Points:
    0
    There are way better 290X options out there for everyone interested in a 390X.
     
  15. ImSpartacus

    ImSpartacus nerf spec plz

    Messages:
    8,598
    Likes Received:
    7
    Trophy Points:
    0
    But I think the idea is that the 390X is worth its price tag. The 980 is like $500 and the 390X is a hair under $500. Both perform pretty much the same.

    So suggesting a 290X to everyone interested in a 390X is like suggesting a 970 to everyone interested in a 980. Yes, there's a price difference, but there's also a performance difference.
     
  16. McGyver

    McGyver Experimental Pedagogue

    Messages:
    6,533
    Likes Received:
    31
    Trophy Points:
    0
  17. ImSpartacus

    ImSpartacus nerf spec plz

    Messages:
    8,598
    Likes Received:
    7
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Yeah, That's normal once you're in that spectrum of the gpu market. There's a ton of precedence for that kind of price to performance curve. Sure, it's goofy because we're taking about the same exact chip, but that's ultimately irrelevant in a discussion purely about price and performance.

    Oh and Hawaii was previously using smaller "old gen" gddr5 chips because it had to have twice as many to populate its double-sized bus compared to something like a 980. It's speculated that using more modern chips helped get that 20% bump in speed compared to the 290 series. The capacity bump may have just been a side effect, albeit surely a welcome one.
     
  18. Beerdude26

    Beerdude26 OnThink(){ IsDownYet(); }

    Messages:
    7,243
    Likes Received:
    13
    Trophy Points:
    0
    4K or bust. I'll probably be getting a Fury X. Was looking at dual Titan X's, so a Fury X at 650 is fucking chump change compared to that
     
  19. ImSpartacus

    ImSpartacus nerf spec plz

    Messages:
    8,598
    Likes Received:
    7
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Just to be completely balanced, the new 980 ti performs just like a titan x and costs the same as a fury x.

    If I was in the market, I would still prefer the fury x for its water cooler, but that's just me.
     
  20. Beerdude26

    Beerdude26 OnThink(){ IsDownYet(); }

    Messages:
    7,243
    Likes Received:
    13
    Trophy Points:
    0
    The new memory is a dealbreaker, I think. I'll be waiting for reviews, but I think the Fury X is going to bust some NVidia balls.
     

Share This Page