Asus ROG STRIX XG43UQ monitor review
Netduma R2 router review
TerraMaster F5-422 NAS Review
Radeon RX 6600 (Sapphire Pulse) review
Radeon RX 6600 (Gigabyte Eagle 8G) review
PowerColor Radeon RX 6900 XT Red Devil review
Corsair Sabre RGB Pro Wireless mouse review
Far Cry 6: PC graphics performance benchmark review
Colorful GeForce RTX 3060 Bilibili 12G review
ACER Predator GM7000 2TB NVMe PCIe 4.0 SSD review
AMD Releases Radeon R9 Fury X details + exclusive photos
Okay, I have the two thumbs up to share the official data with you guys. AMD will release its high-end card based on FIJI GPUs very soon, expect reviews next week as well as availability. In this news-item I am going to share the official details and specifications of the Fury X alongside some photos.
Fiji much like Tonga makes use of 3rd-gen GCN 1.2 architecture, same architecture but obviously scaled up towards a huge 4096 shader processors. The GPU core will be clocked at 1050 MHz and is tied to 4 GB High Bandwidth Memory. This memory runs at a nice 512 GB/s thanks to the extremely wide 4096-bit memory bus. based on 64 compute units thats 64 shader units per CU cluster. It has 64 ROP units and a whopping 256 texture memory units. The product will deliver performance of 8.6 TFLOPS. The HBM memory is indeed 4GB in total, four stacks of 1GB being clocked at 500 MHz, combined they will deliver 512 GB/s of bandwidth.
The power usage will sit at roughly 275 Watt. The product as you guys know is liquid-cooled. Fury X will get three DP 1.2 ports and one HDMI 1.4 connector (there is no HDMI 2.0 support). The Fure X will be available starting June 24th for a price of 649 USD, which is 700 to 750 EURO based on your country and VAT. I attached some screen-shots that display all relevant information, have a peek please.
There she is, the LEDs are power load indicators, at this fully lit stage the GPU is 100% utilized.
Everything about this card screams 4K. Below I have photos of the die and product I took yesterday at an AMD event. Again we have a unit in-house and you can expect the full review next week.
AMD releases list of compatible DirectX 12 graphics cards & APUs - 05/14/2015 02:02 PM
AMD posted a thing or two on its blog about the DX12 API. The blog entry also lists a handy overview of what cards are actually DX12 compatible....
AMD releases The Fixer 3 video - 01/30/2015 05:46 PM
AMD just submitted the new Fixer Video to us to share with you guys. When the enemy is at the gates, there’s only one person to call. But you don’t have to call him, he shows up, i...
AMD releases new 12- and 16-Core Opteron 6300 Series Processors - 01/22/2014 10:16 AM
AMD today announced the immediate availability of its new 12- and 16-core AMD Opteron 6300 Series server processors, code named "Warsaw." Designed for enterprise workloads, the new AMD Opt...
AMD Releases Catalyst 12.1 WHQL Driver Download - 01/26/2012 01:29 PM
AMD has made available the first WHQL-certified graphics drivers of 2012, the Catalyst 12.1. This release includes support for Radeon HD 2000, HD 3000, HD 4000, HD 5000 and HD 6000 series desktops (an...
AMD releases Catalyst 11.11c performance driver - 12/02/2011 01:47 PM
AMD Catalyst 11.11c performance driver features Elder Scrolls Skyrim New in Catalyst 11.11c: Delivers AMD CrossfireX performance scaling for the AMD Radeon HD 5000 Series Delivers AMD CrossfireX pe...
Hirantha
Senior Member
Posts: 254
Joined: 2012-06-26
Senior Member
Posts: 254
Joined: 2012-06-26
#5099737 Posted on: 06/18/2015 03:48 PM
why so many different names? soooo confusing.
why so many different names? soooo confusing.
snip3r_3
Senior Member
Posts: 2983
Joined: 2004-12-17
Senior Member
Posts: 2983
Joined: 2004-12-17
#5099749 Posted on: 06/18/2015 03:53 PM
Fury series is the brand new "Fiji" GPU. The 300 series are simply all rebrands.
why so many different names? soooo confusing.
Fury series is the brand new "Fiji" GPU. The 300 series are simply all rebrands.
ruiner13
Senior Member
Posts: 161
Joined: 2013-11-22
Senior Member
Posts: 161
Joined: 2013-11-22
#5099753 Posted on: 06/18/2015 03:56 PM
I like the design, but really no HDMI 2.0? and 275W at stock clocks is... well... meh. This reeks of being rushed to market. They could have waited for a die shrink and HBM2 for 4+ GB, but it seems the 980Ti really forced their hand, if you ask me.
I like the design, but really no HDMI 2.0? and 275W at stock clocks is... well... meh. This reeks of being rushed to market. They could have waited for a die shrink and HBM2 for 4+ GB, but it seems the 980Ti really forced their hand, if you ask me.
vbetts
Moderator
Posts: 15124
Joined: 2006-07-04
Moderator
Posts: 15124
Joined: 2006-07-04
#5099765 Posted on: 06/18/2015 04:01 PM
Even if the performance is not top of the charts, it more or less is a proof of concept to show that it does have its advantages.
This product now is out there just to show that it's possible to have this tech in a consumer setting. It's AMD saying "Hey, it works and we will improve the next revision."
I like the design, but really no HDMI 2.0? and 275W at stock clocks is... well... meh. This reeks of being rushed to market. They could have waited for a die shrink and HBM2 for 4+ GB, but it seems the 980Ti really forced their hand, if you ask me.
Even if the performance is not top of the charts, it more or less is a proof of concept to show that it does have its advantages.
This product now is out there just to show that it's possible to have this tech in a consumer setting. It's AMD saying "Hey, it works and we will improve the next revision."
Click here to post a comment for this news story on the message forum.
Senior Member
Posts: 2983
Joined: 2004-12-17
The way the pipes are routed (from the "right" side) might be a small issue for people with larger tower coolers in a smaller case. Then again, there doesn't seem to be a really ideal way to place it without hitting certain limitations in certain form factors/cases.
GCN 1.2 though, meaning it was indeed a "brute force" design. Can't wait to see the numbers on a first gen HBM implementation though. Being GCN 1.2 it also should allow for some rough extrapolation of just how much GCN (at least 1.2 with some compression technology) was bandwidth constrained in the past vs 285/380's GDDR5.