Subject: Graphics Cards, Processors | July 7, 2015 - 08:00 AM | Scott Michaud
Tagged: earnings, amd
The projections for AMD's second fiscal quarter had revenue somewhere between flat and down 6%. The actual estimate, as of July 6th, is actually below the entire range. They expect that revenue is down 8% from the previous quarter, rather than the aforementioned 0 to 6%. This is attributed to weaker APU sales in OEM devices, but they also claim that channel sales are in line with projections.
This is disappointing news for fans of AMD, of course. The next two quarters will be more telling though. Q3 will count two of the launch months for Windows 10, which will likely include a bunch of new and interesting devices and aligns well with back to school season. We then get one more chance at a pleasant surprise in the fourth quarter and its holiday season, too. My intuition is that it won't be too much better than however Q3 ends up.
One extra note: AMD has also announced a “one-time charge” of $33 million USD related to a change in product roadmap. Rather than releasing designs at 20nm, they have scrapped those plans and will architect them for “the leading-edge FinFET node”. This might be a small expense compared to how much smaller the process technology will become. Intel is at 14nm and will likely be there for some time. Now AMD doesn't need to wait around at 20nm in the same duration.
Subject: Graphics Cards | July 6, 2015 - 01:58 PM | Jeremy Hellstrom
Tagged: amd, r9 390x, overclocking
Now that [H]ard|OCP has had more time to spend with the new R9 390X they have managed to find the overclocks that they are most comfortable running on the card they used to test. They used MSI Afterburner 4.1.1 and first overclocked the card without changing voltages at all, which netted them 1150MHz core and 6.6GHz effective on the RAM. From there they started to raise to Core Voltage, eventually settling on +50 as settings higher than that resulted in lower maximum observed voltages due to the TDP being reached and the card throttling back. With that voltage setting they could get the card to run at 1180MHz, with the memory speed remaining at 6.6GHz as it is not effected by the core voltage settings, with the fan speed set 80% they saw a consistent 67C GPU temperature. How much impact did that have on performance and could it push the card's performance beyond an overclocked GTX 980? Read the full review to find out in detail.
"We take the new MSI Radeon R9 390X GAMING 8G video card and overclock it to it fullest and compare it with an overclocked GeForce GTX 980 at 1440p and 4K in today's latest games. Find out how much overclocking the R9 390X improves performance, and which video card is best performing. Can R9 390X overclock better than R9 290X?"
Here are some more Graphics Card articles from around the web:
- XFX R9 380 4G DD, XFX Rocks the DD Coolers Again! @ Bjorn3d
- Sapphire R9 390 Nitro 8GB @ Kitguru
- Sapphire R9 390X Tri-X 8GB @ Kitguru
- Visiontek Radeon R9 Fury X 4GB @ Kitguru
- AMD Radeon R9 Fury X @ Legion Hardware
- PowerColor Radeon R9 390 PCS+ 8 GB @ techPowerUp
- AMD R9 Fury X 4GB Graphics Card Crossfire @ eTeknix
- XFX R9 290 Double Dissipation @ Bjorn3d
- NVIDIA GeForce Chips Comparison Table (desktop) @ Hardware Secrets
- MSI GeForce GTX 980 Ti Gaming 6G Review @HiTech Legion
- Gigabyte G1 Gaming Geforce GTX 980 Ti Review @HiTech Legion
- MSI GeForce GTX 980 Ti Gaming 6 GB @ techPowerUp
- EVGA GeForce GTX 980 Ti Superclocked @ Bjorn3d
- EVGA GeForce GTX 980 Ti Superclocked+ Graphics Card Review @ Techgage
- EVGA GTX 980 Ti Superclocked+ ACX 2.0+ Review @ Hardware Canucks
Subject: Graphics Cards | July 3, 2015 - 08:45 PM | Sebastian Peak
Tagged: strix, rumor, report, Radeon Fury, asus, amd
A report from VideoCardz.com shows three listings for an unreleased ASUS STRIX version of the AMD Radeon Fury (non-X).
Image credit: VideoCardz
The listings are from European sites, and all three list the same model name: ASUS-STRIX R9FURY-DC3-4G-GAMING. You can find the listing from the above photo here at the German site Computer-PC-Shop.
Image credit: VideoCardz
We can probably safely assume that this upcoming air-cooled card will make use of the new DirectCU III cooler introduced with the new STRIX GTX 980 Ti and STRIX R9 390X, and this massive triple-fan cooler should provide an interesting look at what Fury can do without the AIO liquid cooler from the Fury X. Air cooling will of course negate the issue of pump whine that many have complained about with certain Fury X units.
The ASUS STRIX R9 390X Gaming card with DirectCU III cooler
We await offical word on this new GPU, and what price we might expect this particular version to sell for here in the U.S.A.
Subject: Graphics Cards | July 2, 2015 - 02:03 PM | Ryan Shrout
Tagged: amd, radeon, fury x, pump whine
According to a couple of users from the Anandtech forums and others, there is another wave of AMD Fury X cards making their way out into the world. Opening up the top of the Fury X card to reveal the Cooler Master built water cooler pump, there are two different configurations in circulation. One has a teal and white Cooler Master sticker, the second one has a shiny CM logo embossed on it.
This is apparently a different pump implementation than we have seen thus far.
You might have read our recent story looking at the review sample as well as two retail purchased Fury X cards where we discovered that the initial pump whine and noise that AMD claimed would be gone, in fact remained to pester gamers. As it turns out, all three of our cards have the teal/white CM logo.
Our three Fury X cards have the same sticker on them.
Based on at least a couple of user reports, this different pump variation does not have the same level of pump whine that we have seen to date. If that's the case, it's great news - AMD has started pushing out Fury X cards to the retail market that don't whine and squeal!
If this sticker/label difference is in fact the indicator for a newer, quieter pump, it does leave us with a few questions. Do current Fury X owners with louder coolers get to exchange them through RMA? Is it possible that these new pump decals are not indicative of a total pump change over and this is just chance? I have asked AMD for details on this new information already, and in fact have been asking for AMD's input on the issue since the day of retail release. So far, no one has wanted to comment on it publicly or offer me any direction as to what is changing and when.
I hope for the gamers' sake that this new pump sticker somehow will be the tell-tale sign that you have a changed cooler implementation. Unfortunately for now, the only way to know if you are buying one of these is to install it in your system and listen or to wait for it to arrive and take the lid off the Fury X. (It's a Hex 1.5 screw by the way.)
Though our budget is more than slightly stretched, I'm keeping an eye out for more Fury X cards to show up for sale to get some more random samples in-house!
Retail cards still suffer from the issue
In our review of AMD's latest flagship graphics card, the Radeon R9 Fury X, I noticed and commented on the unique sound that the card was producing during our testing. A high pitched whine, emanating from the pump of the self-contained water cooler designed by Cooler Master, was obvious from the moment our test system was powered on and remained constant during use. I talked with a couple of other reviewers about the issue before the launch of the card and it seemed that I wasn't alone. Looking around other reviews of the Fury X, most make mention of this squeal specifically.
Noise from graphics cards come in many forms. There is the most obvious and common noise from on-board fans and the air it moves. Less frequently, but distinctly, the sound of inductor coil whine comes up. Fan noise spikes when the GPU gets hot, causing the fans to need to spin faster and move more air across the heatsink, which keeps everything running cool. Coil whine changes pitch based on the frame rate (and the frequency of power delivery on the card) and can be alleviated by using higher quality components on the board itself.
But the sound of our Fury X was unique: it was caused by the pump itself and it was constant. The noise it produced did not change as the load on the GPU varied. It was also 'pitchy' - a whine that seemed to pierce through other sounds in the office. A close analog might be the sound of an older, CRT TV or monitor that is left powered on without input.
In our review process, AMD told us the solution was fixed. In an email sent to the media just prior to the Fury X launch, an AMD rep stated:
In regards to the “pump whine”, AMD received feedback that during open bench testing some cards emit a mild “whining” noise. This is normal for most high speed liquid cooling pumps; Usually the end user cannot hear the noise as the pumps are installed in the chassis, and the radiator fan is louder than the pump. Since the AMD Radeon™ R9 Fury X radiator fan is near silent, this pump noise is more noticeable.
The issue is limited to a very small batch of initial production samples and we have worked with the manufacturer to improve the acoustic profile of the pump. This problem has been resolved and a fix added to production parts and is not an issue.
I would disagree that this is "normal" but even so, taking AMD at its word, I wrote that we heard the noise but also that AMD had claimed to have addressed it. Other reviewers noted the same comment from AMD, saying the result was fixed. But very quickly after launch some users were posting videos on YouTube and on forums with the same (or worse) sounds and noise. We had already started bringing in a pair of additional Fury X retail cards from Newegg in order to do some performance testing, so it seemed like a logical next step for us to test these retail cards in terms of pump noise as well.
First, let's get the bad news out of the way: both of the retail AMD Radeon R9 Fury X cards that arrived in our offices exhibit 'worse' noise, in the form of both whining and buzzing, compared to our review sample. In this write up, I'll attempt to showcase the noise profile of the three Fury X cards in our possession, as well as how they compare to the Radeon R9 295X2 (another water cooled card) and the GeForce GTX 980 Ti reference design - added for comparison.
Subject: General Tech | June 25, 2015 - 03:08 PM | Ken Addison
Tagged: podcast, video, amd, fury x, Fury, Fiji, nvidia, gtx 980ti, maxwell, gm200, batman, arkham knight, gameworks, r9 390, sapphire, nitro, Intel, Braswell, Cherry Trail, Lenovo, thinkcentre
PC Perspective Podcast #355 - 06/25/2015
Join us this week as we discuss the AMD R9 Fury X, Sapphire Nitro R9 390, Batman: Arkham Knight and more!
The URL for the podcast is: http://pcper.com/podcast - Share with your friends!
- iTunes - Subscribe to the podcast directly through the Store
- RSS - Subscribe through your regular RSS reader
- MP3 - Direct download link to the MP3 file
Hosts: Ryan Shrout, Josh Walrath, Sebastian Peak, and Allyn Malventano
Program length: 1:25:13
Subject: Graphics Cards | June 25, 2015 - 02:42 PM | Jeremy Hellstrom
Tagged: 4GB, amd, Fiji, Fury, fury x, hbm, R9, radeon
[H]ard|OCP used a slightly different configuration to test the new R9 Fury X, an i7-3770K on an ASUS PB287Q as opposed to an i7-3960X and an ASUS P9X79, the SSD is slightly different but the RAM remains the same at 16GB of DDR3-1600. [H] also used the same driver as we did and found similar difficulties using it with R9-2xx cards which is why that card was tested with the Catalyst 15.5 Beta. When testing The Witcher 3 the GTX 980 Ti came out on top overall but it is worth noting the Fury's 70% performance increase over the 290X when HairWorks was enabled. Their overall conclusions matched what Ryan saw, read them for yourself right here.
"We review AMD's new Fiji GPU comprising the new AMD Radeon R9 Fury X video card with stacked chip technology High Bandwidth Memory. We take this video card through its paces, make comparisons and find out what it can do for us in real world gameplay. Is this $649 video card competitive? Is it truly geared for 4K gaming as AMD says?"
Here are some more Graphics Card articles from around the web:
- AMD's Radeon R9 Fury X @ The Tech Report
- AMD R9 Fury X Review; Fiji Arrives @ Hardware Canucks
- AMD Fury X @ HardwareHeaven
- AMD Radeon R9 Fury X 4 GB @ techPowerUp
- MSI R9 390X GAMING 8G @ [H]ard|OCP
- MSI R7 370 GAMING 2G Review @ Neoseeker
- PowerColor PCS+ R9 390 8GB Review @ OCC
- PowerColor TurboDuo R9 290 4GB OC @ [H]ard|OCP
- EVGA GTX 980 Ti SC+ 6 GB @ techPowerUp
- EVGA GTX 970 SSC @ HardwareHeaven
Subject: General Tech, Graphics Cards | June 24, 2015 - 10:10 PM | Scott Michaud
Tagged: batman, wb games, consolitis, gameworks, pc gaming, nvidia, amd
Over the last few days, the PC version of Batman: Arkham Knight has been receiving a lot of flak. Sites like PC Gamer were unable to review the game because they allege that Warner Brothers would not provide pre-release copies to journalists except for the PS4 version. This is often met with cynicism that can be akin to throwing darts in an unlit room with the assumption that a dartboard is in there somewhere. Other times, it is validated.
Whether or not the lack of PC review copies was related, the consensus is that Arkham Knight is a broken game. After posting a troubleshooting guide on the forums to help users choose the appropriate settings, WB Games has pulled the plug and suspended the game's sales on Steam until the issues are patched.
TotalBiscuit weighs in on the issues with his latest "Port Report".
No-one seems to be talking about what the issue is. Fortunately or unfortunately, I don't have the game myself so I cannot look and speculate based on debug information (which they probably disabled from the released game anyway). I could wildly speculate about DX11 limits from the number of elements on screen, but that is not based on any actual numbers. They could be really good at instancing and other tricks to keep the chunks of work being sent to the GPU as large as possible. I don't know. Whatever the issue is, it sounds pretty bad.
A fury unlike any other...
Officially unveiled by AMD during E3 last week, we are finally ready to show you our review of the brand new Radeon R9 Fury X graphics card. Very few times has a product launch meant more to a company, and to its industry, than the Fury X does this summer. AMD has been lagging behind in the highest-tiers of the graphics card market for a full generation. They were depending on the 2-year-old Hawaii GPU to hold its own against a continuous barrage of products from NVIDIA. The R9 290X, despite using more power, was able to keep up through the GTX 700-series days, but the release of NVIDIA's Maxwell architecture forced AMD to move the R9 200-series parts into the sub-$350 field. This is well below the selling prices of NVIDIA's top cards.
The AMD Fury X hopes to change that with a price tag of $650 and a host of new features and performance capabilities. It aims to once again put AMD's Radeon line in the same discussion with enthusiasts as the GeForce series.
The Fury X is built on the new AMD Fiji GPU, an evolutionary part based on AMD's GCN (Graphics Core Next) architecture. This design adds a lot of compute horsepower (4,096 stream processors) and it also is the first consumer product to integrate HBM (High Bandwidth Memory) support with a 4096-bit memory bus!
Of course the question is: what does this mean for you, the gamer? Is it time to start making a place in your PC for the Fury X? Let's find out.
Subject: Graphics Cards | June 19, 2015 - 06:25 PM | Ryan Shrout
Tagged: radeon, r9 390, hawaii, catalyst, amd, 15.15
During the course of our review of the new Sapphire Nitro R9 390 8GB card earlier this week, a question came up on driver support. For testing the R9 300-series as well as the Fury X cards, AMD provided a new Catalyst 15.15 beta driver. The problem is that these drivers would not install on the Radeon R9 200-series cards. That's not totally uncommon on new GPU releases but it does seem a bit odd considering the similarities between the R9 390 and the R9 290, for example.
That meant that in our review we had to use the Catalyst 15.5 beta for the Radeon R9 290X and the Radeon R9 290 GPU while using the newer Catalyst 15.15 beta for the Sapphire Nitro R9 390. Eyebrows were raised as you would expect as any performance differences between the new cards and the old cards would have to take into account the driver changes as well. But since we couldn't install the new driver on the old hardware, we were stuck, and published what we had.
Since then, a driver with some INI modifications that allows Catalyst 15.15 to be installed on Radeon R9 290X/290 hardware was built and uploaded from the Guru3D Forums. Today I installed that on our XFX Radeon R9 290 4GB card used in our R9 390 review to re-run a few game tests to see what changes we saw, if any. This would help us address any concerns over the updated driver causing performance changes rather than the hardware changes.
(Note: I realize that using an INI hacked driver isn't exactly going to pass QA with AMD, but I think we are seeing results that are close enough.)
First up, let's look at Grand Theft Auto V.
In GTA V we see that the average frame rate at 2560x1440 goes from 39.5 FPS to 40.5 FPS, an increase of about 2-3%. That's minimal but it is interesting to see how the frame rate consistency changes as we move down the sliding scale; pay attention to the orange and pink lines in the FPS by Percentile graph to see what I am referencing. As you move into the slower frame times in our testing, the gap between the 15.5 and 15.15 driver begins to widen slightly, indicating a little more frame time consistency in 15.15 release.
But what about BF4 or Metro: Last Light?