I don't think AMD failed to deliver, they actually brave enough to invest on HBM and get it into market first. That alone is a credit. Just like they did with GDDR5. Only this time their involvement in HBM is more direct.
Despite alot of problem in manufacturing the chip, they manage to at least match the 980Ti performance, and the best part their pricing is still lower than 980Ti.
Maybe our expectation is too high on AMD for this card to beat the Titan X. For sure nvidia Pascal is more mature product when it is release, but AMD will have the upper hand in terms of experience and familiarities with HBM technology.
The best freesync monitor that you can buy now. RM2699 at compuzone. But not the best gaming monitor yet, as the VRR window is 35-90hz. Another interesting(downside) aspect of freesync monitor (maybe for only this monitor), when you enable the freesync mode in OSD, it stuck with that mode. A gaming scenario is when you in freesync in a game, suddenly you have more than 90fps to push to the monitor, you'll get the classic tearing. Of course you can cap the fps at CCC.
The question is how will you get to choose for the monitor to refresh at 144hz (disable freesync) when you in game? Because AMD said the VRR is negotiated before hand. The freesync enabled/disable switch in OSD, windows will detect as new device/monitor. Not sure you can toggle this mode while you gaming.
This post has been edited by ruffstuff: Jun 30 2015, 03:00 PM
does AMD driver have no issues with RGB 0-255? Does it detect your monitor as LCD TV or PC monitor?
Because nvidia haven't fixed this yet. When you hook up your monitor through hdmi, the RGB will be limited to 16-235. As this is the default standard for HDMI devices. Normal for LCD TV.
Huh? You can set RGB Full Range 0-255 at Nvidia Control Panel for quite a while now since last year. In any case, guess AMD really had 30k unit of fury x available for year 2015 even though AMD denied this rumour.
But there are many report around the net that customers are not able to purchase fury x. Some even got their order delayed until July and October. Few of them got their fury x order delayed to December.
Air cooled edition will be released on 14 July,so I can only guess AMD plan to spread out the 30K unit evenly for June to December.
Since Fury Nano is cutdown based on Fiji core as well........uh oh, feels like a foreboding.
That happened because of the monitor. Some monitors I found by default set to TV instead of PC (monitor) which you can change in the monitor OSD setup menu. Can you use Full RGB with VSR?
not monitor. The hdmi interface. It is known issue. Now they already fixed it i guess.
In my case, it's the monitor. FYI, with some monitors you can change between TV & PC (monitor) in the OCD setup menu. Some monitors set it to TV by default. So it is actually not hdmi interface issue because if it is all people will have this problem. Nothing change in HDMI specs though. Currently people either using HDMI 1.4 or 2.0 cable. The issue happened either because of the monitor (default set to TV) or the driver failed to auto-detect the monitor type properly.
If your monitor have that to change between TV and PC, it is the scaler have the extra function.
The HDMI group defines that all HDMI CE, should have limited RGB by default. HDMI wasn't meant for PC in the first place. It is not part of VESA.
It'll be no suprise if the nano is more expensive than Fury X. It is essentially a Fury x, with just a lower clockspeed. Everything else is equal. You can dump a fury bios, and run it with custom wc. The R9 nano will be the better binned of the Fiji chip.
It's like defeating the purposes and advantages of short PCB...
But well, if it can perform as it should, I guess most (with large casings) won't complain at all.
i've anticipated on the huge heatsink will defeat the purpose of short form-factor advantage. Just because the fury TDP is high, the need of huge heatsink is inevitable.
Looking forward on how AMD managed to do the small heatsink to dissipates Fiji heat on the Nano.
Not only that it will further cut down more than Fury for sure. Maybe less shader and TMU.
Anandtech table shows the nano have the exact amount of shaders as the Fury X. That is quite surprising actually. Thus Ryan smith concluded that the Nano will be more expensive than the Fury X.
Am i the only one who not surprise with the R9 Nano pricing? When Ryan smith hinted that the R9 Nano will be the best fiji chip bin, and he also said the price will be even more than the R9 Fury X. That was several month ago when AMD just launch their Fiji line up. Luckily the price is the same as R9 Fury X.
Jun 25 2015, 05:52 AM
Quote
0.0475sec
0.91
7 queries
GZIP Disabled