Amd radeon r9 fury
It also demands a 120mm fan mount dedicated to it, and builders must find a way to route the flexible tubes that carry liquid to and from the radiator. Yes, the Fury X itself is smaller than the GTX 980 Ti, but when the cooler’s mass is included, it’s a bit larger. It’s not all sunshine and roses, though, because the card’s smaller size and larger cooler cancel each other out. The GTX 980 Ti requires one 8-pin and one 6-pin power connector, while the Fury X needs two 8-pin connections.
![amd radeon r9 fury amd radeon r9 fury](https://i.pinimg.com/originals/e2/16/39/e21639eccb6f06591da248b6268fdfdd.jpg)
AMD also ships its card with a liquid cooler. The Fury X comes in at just under eight inches long – about 2.5 inches shorter than not only the Nvidia GTX 980 Ti, but also the GTX 980, 970 and 960 (the standard PCB length is the same for all three). You need a lot of horizontal space and a case with solid air-flow. The GTX 980 Ti is a gorgeous card, but it’s also large and air-cooled. For the first time in years the company’s build quality and design exceeds the green team – and the gap isn’t small. There’s no need to handicap either because of pricing.Īt a glance, that works to AMD’s advantage. This makes comparisons between the two rather simple. Nvidia’s second-quickest video card carries an MSRP of $649, and the Fury X mimics it exactly. While the Fury X seems to compete with the GTX Titan X, based on its specification sheet, on price it actually lines up with the GTX 980 Ti. The real question is whether that bandwidth improvement – and the drastic increase in Stream Processor count – will be enough to put the card in contention with Nvidia’s latest.
![amd radeon r9 fury amd radeon r9 fury](https://www.picclickimg.com/d/l400/pict/333087236982_/Sapphire-Radeon-R9-Fury-Nitro-4GB-HBM-AMD.jpg)
The Fury X quotes overall memory bandwidth of 512 gigabytes per second, again well ahead of a GeForce GTX Titan X, which quotes 336 gigabytes per second (the GTX 980 Ti’s bandwidth is also 336GB/s). AMD says that, relative to a GDDR5 card, memory bandwidth per watt increases up to three and a half times, and overall bandwidth per chip improves almost four-fold.Ĭertainly, the on-paper results are impressive.
![amd radeon r9 fury amd radeon r9 fury](https://cdn.videocardz.com/1/2014/02/Sapphire-R9-290X-VAPOR-X-8GB-Front.jpg)
This is a more efficient use of both space and power. HBM stacks memory chips vertically and places them very close to the GPU itself. We’ve already written on the matter extensively, as AMD leaked out details of High Bandwidth Memory well in advanced, but here’s the summary of what you need to know. The Fury X’s chip still fits in the Graphics Core Next family, and is still built on the tried-and-true 28 nanometer production process. The result is a quoted compute performance of 8.6 Teraflops, which is way ahead of anything else on the market – the Nvidia Titan X quotes a peak compute power of 6.14 TFLOPS.īut the basics are the same as any other current Radeon. Stream Processor count per Compute Unit has risen to 16, the most seen so far, and the overall SP count is way ahead of anything AMD has produced before. The Fiji’s 4,096 Stream Processors are arranged into 64 compute units and four primary Shader Engines. The GPU architecture, known as Fiji, is technically new, but it’s really a variation of the Hawaii chip in AMD’s Radeon R9 290X, which itself is a variation of its predecessors. That’s not to say it’s unimportant – but it is typically a known quantity. Aside from the amount of memory (in this case, 4GB), and the width of the memory interface used, there’s typically not much comment on RAM. The Fury line’s spotlight on memory is unusual, as it’s rarely the focus of a new video card release. So, you know – no pressure! It’s all about HBM Will it make up the widening gap? Or is HBM, like the Phenom, more brilliant in theory than in practice? The future of AMD may ride on this card. AMD’s answer is yet another dramatic all-new design the Radeon R9 Fury X, the first video card to use High Bandwidth Memory.
![amd radeon r9 fury amd radeon r9 fury](https://www.legitreviews.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/fury-fan.jpg)
The company’s schedule of graphics architectures has fallen behind its chief competition, Nvidia. Now, AMD finds itself at another turning point. Phenom’s failure to keep up the company’s fortunes was a turning point, and AMD processors haven’t been able to go toe-to-toe with Intel’s best ever since. It was an impressive piece of engineering – but it failed to keep up with Intel’s latest, and early models contained a rare but nasty bug. It needed a savior, so it went big, designing and all-new processor called Phenom. Its Athlon architecture, which challenged Intel at the turn of the century, was aging. The year was 2007, and AMD’s back was against the wall.