And that EK-FC RX-480 water block obviously is intended for the reference design Radeon RX 480. This is the very first block, straight from the CNC machine and will come in all four standard variant... EK preps FC RX-480 water block
Not sure why anyone would want to watercool the reference model, with only a 6-pin power connector, especially considering the PCI-E power draw is already too high.
Good stuff , but it better be cheap , really cheap , in the $79US Dollars area or less to be worth it for a $199US Dollars video card !
PCI-E power draw is not confirmed by AMD could be just a bad batch of GPUs. 980Ti violated 75 watt spec too. woop de doo. mobo can handle tons of extra power... this all blown out of proportion. http://media.bestofmicro.com/J/I/498366/original/15-Gaming-PEG-Total.png and why not water cool it? 2 make more power then a 1080 and its probably still cheaper with waterblocks then a 1080 air cooled (if you can find them) if you are upgrading an existing water cooled system...
This doesn't look like a violation. Two are equal to a 1080 when the multiGPU setup works perfectly, and even then you get worse frame pacing. A single 1070 is a better choice over 2x480.
^^^^^^^^^^^^THIS^^^^^^^^^^^^^ There are ppl buying 2 480 GPUs right fooled by the AMD PR and some members here expecting to beat a single 1080...in a regular basis. No AMD AOTS showcase is not the norm is a heavily promoted exception. 480 CFX will be a 1070 in some games...and fail miserably in the major part of the rest. A single 1070 performs better than 2 480 in almost every game and spent less power than a single 480. Advice coming from an AMD CFX customer not fooled by AMD PR slides or forum comments. In any case everybody is free to burn his money in multiple GPUs, loose his time in elusive (or impossible) CFX gaming and "enjoying" increased power bill and room temp. On topic: I like EK blocks but this one for reference is a bad choice because the GPU PCB itself is bad. It's better to wait for an EK block designed for a third party 480 model with a custom PCB and at least 6+6 pin or 8+6.
come on guys, EK is just a business, they will offer a product for the market.. and remember that this card is aimed for mainstream market, not to beat the 1080
nice looking block. im sure it performs well, im very happy with the performance of the EK block i use. however, personally, im not going to bother getting a reference model 480; i watercool to OC, not just keep temps down, & i need better power delivery. i hope that the custom PCBs will retain layout compatibility, but im not going to bank on it
not sure what you did wrong with your CF setup, but my LCS 290xs run crossfire fine in 95% games that I play. much better then my old gtx 480 SLI setup. I don't blame the hardware, i blame lazy developers for the 5% that don't support m-gpu properly. As a PC hobbyist, I enjoy working with mGPU system so cost isn't really an issue for me. but to ignore the benefits of mgpu systems like they don't exist is just being ignorant. the benefits are real. I had to fiddle with 3rd party nvidia inspector tool way too much with nvidia to get the proper positive scaling. AMD side is much easier from my experience and scaling is noticeably better as well.
I enjoyed a lot my CFX setup but having GOOD gaming with it on game launch (no stutter, good scaling) is not the norm...is the exception. I.e. Fallout needed months to have a proper CFX profile and TW3 still have some stutter and many games have bad (included negative scaling) or no support at all. 95% GOOD multiGPU support in games is a dream at least in AMD side. Take a look at the list of games tested for 480 CFX vs 1070/1080 (i don't remember the site, i will look for the link). Ofc if we cherry pick the games with perfect mgpu support 100% will work fine! I don't ignore the benefits but promoting a 480 CFX as if it was something that works "automatically" and beat a Nvidia 1080 in a regular basis as AMD 480 PR slide implies and some members here is to try to fool ppl. MGPU setups are for enthusiasts who are fully aware of the problems (and benefits) you get. Simply take a look at the "know issues" in AMD drivers for the last 12 months drivers: "CFX issue in game X we recommend to disable it..." Is the most repeated problem and the most common solution from AMD is to disable it. Even Raja Koduri (RTG boss) said AMD is only interested in promoting CFX for games that have low FPS...the rest is for developers (DX12 implicit...if any). There is no tool like Nvidia inspector avalaible for AMD CFX profile tuning. I agree, scaling is ok when it works.
