It's a throwback from the original naming convention used by ATi, XTX being the top tier model, followed by XT and the XL being the value version of the top card. Remember the 9800XT? X800XT or X800XL? Or the X1950XTX etc.

You´re right! I completely forgot about them... Feel free to mock me for this stupid mistake...:bang: Still i dislike the naming scheme and i wish they used something better. Also if they are found of the past, them bring back the ATI name instead of AMD graphics...

Because it was just the return pipe from the water block flattened on one side and taped to the VRM's the water was moving over it too fast to do any real heat transfer. VRM temps where reported in the 90's at default in some reviews. While that is within safe temperatures for the VRM it does seem very high for a water cooled card. In fact most AIO cooled hybrid cards with a blower fan going across the VRM's do good as well.

OK, I am now going back to elementary to see why I do not think that this statement is from our universe. And just fyi, there wes report claiming that liquid itself reached 100 degrees Celsius. IIRC we laughed at that too.

Well thank god my GTX 1080TI only runs at 278 watts undervolted,and not frigging 300 watts I would never buy that card.

I don't think anyone really cares about power usage alone. If it uses more power than Ti but is significantly slower, that's the issue. Poor perf/watt

It's a throwback from the original naming convention used by ATi, XTX being the top tier model, followed by XT and the XL being the value version of the top card. Remember the 9800XT? X800XT or X800XL? Or the X1950XTX etc.

Yep, some of these were kings of the hill, where Nvidias own flagships could not touch (9800XT and x1950XTX). I can understand AMD trying to recapture the old ATI glory days with the new naming scheme.

OK, I am now going back to elementary to see why I do not think that this statement is from our universe. And just fyi, there wes report claiming that liquid itself reached 100 degrees Celsius. IIRC we laughed at that too.

Would you like to refute the statement that the VRM's got to excess of 90°C? Or are you going to start another sh*tposting sh*t storm again to derail the topic at hand in another one of your strawman troll fests? http://www.overclock.net/content/type/61/id/2500269/width/500/height/1000/flags/LL

Would you like to refute the statement that the VRM's got to excess of 90°C? Or are you going to start another sh*tposting sh*t storm again to derail the topic at hand in another one of your strawman troll fests? http://www.overclock.net/content/type/61/id/2500269/width/500/height/1000/flags/LL

The problem was Certainly not going to be fast flowing water, but rather bad contact of the pipe to the VRMs

All of these crybabies crying about TDP. We are enthusiast, not green power users.. Crying about the power usuage of a gpu, but many of you have a heavily overclocked CPU. Yes while the power usuage is lower on a cpu, i find it hilarious irony. And the Fury X had a heatpipe over the VRM that was part of the AIO. There was no VRM issues on the Fury X. I had one.

The reason why I care about TDP is pretty simple. I hate noise and excessive heat coming from my PC.

Would you like to refute the statement that the VRM's got to excess of 90°C? Or are you going to start another sh*tposting sh*t storm again to derail the topic at hand in another one of your strawman troll fests? http://www.overclock.net/content/type/61/id/2500269/width/500/height/1000/flags/LL

I excuse you lack of elementary physics knowledge, but will advice you to read this. http://www.guru3d.com/articles-pages/amd-radeon-r9-fury-x-review,12.html I get that that thermodynamics missed you. But please, consider that HH could not measure high temperatures on back plate as fact, that this back plate works as heat shield. Therefore temperature every Fury X with back plate reaches in given area of board should be considerably higher than those from your source. And think about heat transfer, if back of PCB had 104 degrees Celsius, then VRMs on other side of it have much more. Every Fury X owner can tell you their VRMs temperatures under load... Or you can go through owners' thread and find them yourself. And I wonder if ocn forum sourced those images from that amateurish French site. (Really can't check it easily on cellphone.)

The problem was Certainly not going to be fast flowing water, but rather bad contact of the pipe to the VRMs

It was poor design however. Though moving to fast may have been an incorrect reason and more on not enough surface area. It still doesn't take away from the VRM's were not adequately cooled. With Vega appearing to consume 350W+ in the XTX variety I hope they have a better solution for cooling the VRM. @Fox the image was the first FLIR image I saw on Google image that had the back plate removed. Here are some more. This is just the front cover taken off so the heat from the VRM is saturating the coolant tube over the VRM so poor contact can be ruled out. I had not seen anyone claim coolant hitting 100°C (that would cause pump failure no). http://www.overclock.net/content/type/61/id/2500270/width/500/height/1000/flags/LL

Please, heat complaining again...the event is labeled "Capsaicin". Absolutely no deceptive marketing involved. Plus there are stars and there are planets. Stars are hotter than volcanoes. When they get to a naming convention with ice and subzero temperature references we can then complain about how slow it is. Heat is all about motion and this thing moves. Does it matter it is not faster or as fast as a 1080ti...no. Those that wanted one of those already have it.

Review of the LC Vega FE: https://www.pcper.com/reviews/Graphics-Cards/AMD-Radeon-Vega-Frontier-Edition-16GB-Liquid-Cooled-Review

Please, heat complaining again...the event is labeled "Capsaicin". Absolutely no deceptive marketing involved. Plus there are stars and there are planets. Stars are hotter than volcanoes. When they get to a naming convention with ice and subzero temperature references we can then complain about how slow it is. Heat is all about motion and this thing moves. Does it matter it is not faster or as fast as a 1080ti...no. Those that wanted one of those already have it.

Nothing about this post makes any sense. "you can't complain about perf/w because AMD marketed it's event/architecture names towards how poor it's perf/w is" - Raja/Slides say otherwise but clearly AMD thinks it's better to get their marketing across via metaphor in naming. "you can't complain about temps because temps is 'motion'".. even though the entire argument is that the 'motion' is worse for the heat that's outputted. "you can't complain about the performance relative to competition because 'no'" - I don't even know how to respond to this. "Those that wanted one of those already have it." - despite the fact that I've personally seen hundreds of posts of people saying "i'm going to wait to see if Vega is better"

It was poor design however. Though moving to fast may have been an incorrect reason and more on not enough surface area. It still doesn't take away from the VRM's were not adequately cooled. With Vega appearing to consume 350W+ in the XTX variety I hope they have a better solution for cooling the VRM. @Fox the image was the first FLIR image I saw on Google image that had the back plate removed. Here are some more. This is just the front cover taken off so the heat from the VRM is saturating the coolant tube over the VRM so poor contact can be ruled out. I had not seen anyone claim coolant hitting 100°C (that would cause pump failure no). http://www.overclock.net/content/type/61/id/2500270/width/500/height/1000/flags/LL

Obviously something was not right in a number of cases (I've not heard about this issue being anywhere near universal), from the look of the design if mounted correctly it should have had good contact area and plenty of ability to dissipate enough heat. So must have been a mounting/TIM issue ?

It was poor design however. Though moving to fast may have been an incorrect reason and more on not enough surface area. It still doesn't take away from the VRM's were not adequately cooled. With Vega appearing to consume 350W+ in the XTX variety I hope they have a better solution for cooling the VRM. @Fox the image was the first FLIR image I saw on Google image that had the back plate removed. Here are some more. This is just the front cover taken off so the heat from the VRM is saturating the coolant tube over the VRM so poor contact can be ruled out. I had not seen anyone claim coolant hitting 100°C (that would cause pump failure no). http://www.overclock.net/content/type/61/id/2500270/width/500/height/1000/flags/LL

Congrats, You found it. That's very image showing tubes carrying liquid reaching close to 100°C. Guess what will be GPU temperature if its cooling medium reaches 100°C. Or if it reaches even 60°C. YES! It will be Higher than 50°C HH measured. Yes, it will be higher than 52°C I have with radiator fan speed reduced to 11~14% (Auto). And guess what? If cooling medium has such high temperature, Radiator itself will reach pretty close to that. But HH measured 45°C on radiator, and up to 42°C on tubes (because they are insulated by plastic mesh). And that corresponds with my readings done by IR thermometer. So congratulations once more. Things you posted are nothing less than blatant lies.

If AMD is for poor people how do they afford the gigantic power bills caused by AMD cards? LOL AMD's TDP has never affected my power bill in any significant way. The AMD enthusiasts could care less about TDP. I've owned the 7970, 290X and 295x2. 300 watts on a card far more powerful than those cards is great to me.

Review of the LC Vega FE: https://www.pcper.com/reviews/Graphics-Cards/AMD-Radeon-Vega-Frontier-Edition-16GB-Liquid-Cooled-Review

Terrific review. 1500$ GPU is only able to beat Nvidia 1080 by a slim margin in a couple benchs...and lost in the rest by not so slim margin. AMD gaming GPU drivers team must be praying in all know religions right now asking for miracles.

Obviously something was not right in a number of cases (I've not heard about this issue being anywhere near universal), from the look of the design if mounted correctly it should have had good contact area and plenty of ability to dissipate enough heat. So must have been a mounting/TIM issue ?

Considering the picture is showing the coolant pipe itself and not the backside of the PCB reaching 100°C that would indicate good contact. Not too sure what is going on here other than the current solution is not keeping up with the VRM's.

Congrats, You found it. That's very image showing tubes carrying liquid reaching close to 100°C. Guess what will be GPU temperature if its cooling medium reaches 100°C. Or if it reaches even 60°C. YES! It will be Higher than 50°C HH measured. Yes, it will be higher than 52°C I have with radiator fan speed reduced to 11~14% (Auto). And guess what? If cooling medium has such high temperature, Radiator itself will reach pretty close to that. But HH measured 45°C on radiator, and up to 42°C on tubes (because they are insulated by plastic mesh). And that corresponds with my readings done by IR thermometer. So congratulations once more. Things you posted are nothing less than blatant lies.

Yes it will if it is transferring the heat. I'm saying it's not transferring the heat adequately. Is the too hard for you to understand? If the coolant pipe is hitting 100°C but the coolant temps is staying in the mid 40's then heat transfer is not happening.

Hopefully the XT and XTX variants will be physically identical, apart from the coolers. that way if there is any BIOS limitations, it should be possible to flash an XT into an XTX (and slap a Waterblock on it 😉)

That's same I want to know if cards are identical except cooler so we can simply remove and replace it with a full cover water block.

I thought the Fury X had a heatpipe over the VRM's that connected to the Waterblock ? It should have been pretty cool, I would have thought...

Vega has completely different cooling compared to Fury and looking at disassembled pictures, the block is covering VRMs as well, at least on water cooled Vega FE. On top of that, you can check PCB analysis done on Vega FE and find out that VRM's on Vega are a litte bit over kill, we can just hope RX Vega will keep same VRM design.

Considering the picture is showing the coolant pipe itself and not the backside of the PCB reaching 100°C that would indicate good contact. Not too sure what is going on here other than the current solution is not keeping up with the VRM's. Yes it will if it is transferring the heat. I'm saying it's not transferring the heat adequately. Is the too hard for you to understand? If the coolant pipe is hitting 100°C but the coolant temps is staying in the mid 40's then heat transfer is not happening.

This may help you to understand: [spoiler]http://techreport.com/r.x/radeon-r9-fury-x/card-inside.jpg[/spoiler] Please notice Plastic tube on the left going down (That takes cooling medium from GPU). Then it is connected to copper pipe which takes heat from VRMs. On that image, mentioned plastic tube is already very hot. That brings us to tube coming back from radiator. You can barely see it as it has nearly same temperature as that 100°C background. And quite unbelievably image shows that plastic PCIe-Power connectors did reach close to 100°C too. (Did they help them with heat gun?) And some other heat anomalies. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = When I have those 2 images side by side, I see that copper heatpipe being bent close to PCIe-Power. On actual photo, this bending (half circle) is quite bigger than one PCIe-Power connector. On "IR image" it is quite tiny. I can't leave out possibility that it was actually fabrication to begin with. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = And just for you I did 40minutes torture test with: PUBG + Luxmark Interactive Mode (Time unlimited) => OC GPU, OC HBM, +36mV on GPU (even while it does clock there when under-volted), and Since radiator is inside case behind tiny mesh = worse airflow => That means worse conditions than ones in open bench reviews. Screenshot made exactly 60s after test end to see that it does transfer heat away. [spoiler]http://i63.tinypic.com/1763j8.png[/spoiler]