Aren't all modern high-end HSFs work with flat copper tubes touching the CPU, and then going to fins to cool them? The same exact principle is working here. The flat copper tube touches the vrm and the heat is water transferred to the radiator. This is basic stuff really. It's still fishy somehow.
Toasty mosfets means an unstable overclock, it also means degradation sooner rather than later, guaranteed unless cooled properly.
That is just racist. And it's been confirmed by another site from Denmark as well. So they're no good at doing things too, one would imagine? This puts AMD in even worse position, their attempt to "cover" things up literally backfired.
I had no idea the French weren't part of the "human race"? If anything it's an example of xenophobia.
We all know they are "white", "black", "yellow", "blue" (tuareg) and...French. Jokes apart Xenophobia is a more proper word to define it.
From reviews the card doesn't seem to run that hot yet the thermal image paints a different picture. I don't know what to believe. If the thermal image is true that would have to mean AMD didn't give two cents or this aio with copper vrm cooling was the best they could come up with? It just does not compute.
Pretty soon AMD won't have any money left to make stupid FIX3R videos, and AMDMatt and AMDJoe are gonna become average Matt and average Joe and we'll live happily ever after in a more green environment. :infinity:
Actually CPU hsfs are full of liquid whose whole purpose is to heat up and go to the fins for cooling. It is exactly the same principle, but thermodynamics get the role of the pump.
Yes. It's likely that, and the fact that the card is really being pushed to remain competitive at stock in the first place.
If someone is looking to build a new comp and had no love for either AMD or Nvidia....why would they choose the Fury X? The 980ti beats it in most benchmarks, does not require space to mount the radiator. The 980ti has more memory....even though it is not HBM, for most people six is better then four. From a technology standpoint it is a cool idea, but the people that buy these cards want to show off FPS, OC ability, benchmarks etc. If you are a fan of AMD, you have nothing atm that Nvidia can't beat. Also some keep mentioning that we should wait for better drivers for it to shine....Well, how long has BF4 been out? Are you telling me they could not have their drivers polished enough to make it kick ass in that game if they could? It is not a bad card, but from a marketing standpoint it is a complete failure. The gpu business is a king of the hill battle. AMD ran up the hill and tripped at Nvidia's feet. Pretty sure some at AMD will be loosing their jobs.....
:heh: :heh: :thumbup: i like the reviews though, it shows that the fury competes with the titan x at 1440p and 2160p. and i am sure we dont have to wait 6 months for a driver. asder00... 2160p -> goodbye MSAA, goodbye 1000€ titan x http://www.golem.de/news/radeon-r9-...erg-schlaegt-nvidias-titan-1506-114780-6.html
The driver is the on-the-fly compiler and scheduler for the GPU. If you have a newer GPU, then yes, you need time to optimize it for that. As for all the rest, my only doubt about the AMD card is what I see about VRM temps. After what has happened with Kepler I wouldn't trust NVIDIA with a long term investment.
I suspect nobody responsible will loose his job SPECIALLY where is more needed: in the driver department.
But AMD has had this card since inception. Are you saying that Nvidia will keep staying ahead of the Fury X with their 980ti because they will also update their drivers? As for Kepler....not sure I understand your statement. Kepler based cards are still viable cards. 780ti is still a great card that is close to the 970.
The drivers are surely bad. They have worse frametime variance than the 295x2. I just saw the Tech Report review that has frame variance and 99th percentile metrics. :bang: That's a disaster for a single GPU. How come nobody else reports this? My 7970 shouldn't be on par with the Titan/780 on new games. Either NVIDIA doesn't improve their drivers, or their hardware doesn't prove to be as impressive in the long run.
GTX780 is way better than 290. 1.No overhead problems 2.HBAO+ bits AA-Bits 3.PHYSX-GPU The 290 is two years old !!! I have in many games 15FPS more with my GTX780DCII in CPU limited scenarios (DX11) 780 GHZ faster than 290X tri-x. http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/graphics/2014/03/14/gigabyte-geforce-gtx-780-ghz-edition-review/3