AMD CEO Lisa Su Interview: Confident In Next Graphics Launch, Zen's Success Is Key

[ammaross]

The question at hand is "Can Fury change AMDs financial position ?" I suggested that for the card to be successful, it should be priced at $639 (cheaper than 980n Ti) and not $699 because capturing the 4k market is not enough to change AMDs market share. based upon leaked performance data, 4k is the segment that Fury will have a lead over the 980 Ti. If you are suggesting that peeps while my a more expensive card that performs less than it's competitor which requires less power and produces less heat, I wouldn't know how to address such an argument.

From the article: "The Radeon water-cooled R9 Fury X will cost $649 and will be available on June 24."

So, your entire premise of retort is on incorrectly-recalled information. Also, the Fury X is dual Fiji GPUs on HBM, so performance should be more in line with the 295X2 if you're wanting to look at performance, and based on Tom's own review of the 980Ti, the 295X2 quite handily defeats the 980 Ti, so you're incorrect on that count as well (assuming the comparison with 295X2 holds true).

 

[Eggz]

Fury X isn't dual GPU. It's just the watercooled version. The Fury is the aircooled version. There's a separate card with two GPUs.

Compare this

http://www.engadget.com/2015/06/16/amd-r9-fury-x/

with this

http://wccftech.com/amd-dual-fiji-fury-graphics-card/

 

[jimmysmitty]

The question at hand is "Can Fury change AMDs financial position ?" I suggested that for the card to be successful, it should be priced at $639 (cheaper than 980n Ti) and not $699 because capturing the 4k market is not enough to change AMDs market share. based upon leaked performance data, 4k is the segment that Fury will have a lead over the 980 Ti. If you are suggesting that peeps while my a more expensive card that performs less than it's competitor which requires less power and produces less heat, I wouldn't know how to address such an argument.

From the article: "The Radeon water-cooled R9 Fury X will cost $649 and will be available on June 24."

So, your entire premise of retort is on incorrectly-recalled information. Also, the Fury X is dual Fiji GPUs on HBM, so performance should be more in line with the 295X2 if you're wanting to look at performance, and based on Tom's own review of the 980Ti, the 295X2 quite handily defeats the 980 Ti, so you're incorrect on that count as well (assuming the comparison with 295X2 holds true).

As said the Fury X is just a top of the line water cooled single GPU card. The dual GPU card is coming later. I think there are others too but I kinda want it to be called the Fury Rage Maxx. Bring back the old school names man.

 

[Eggz]

I think there are others too but I kinda want it to be called the Fury Rage Maxx. Bring back the old school names man.

I'm tired of all these fierce names. What about cute names? Like "Butterfly," or "Tulip?" Overclockers would love that

 

[de5_Roy]

I'm tired of all these fierce names. What about cute names? Like "Butterfly," or "Tulip?" Overclockers would love that

my suggestions:
cinderella
lucy
mary (just replaced two letters!!)
mother teresa (e.g. rage fury maxx mother teresa)
anna/elsa (elsa is an actual brand name)
ir..wait intel took that one already..
...
irene 😛
...
tammy lynn
.....

 

[Eggz]

I'm tired of all these fierce names. What about cute names? Like "Butterfly," or "Tulip?" Overclockers would love that

my suggestions:
cinderella
lucy
mary (just replaced two letters!!)
mother teresa (e.g. rage fury maxx mother teresa)
anna/elsa (elsa is an actual brand name)
ir..wait intel took that one already..
...
irene 😛
...
tammy lynn
.....

I like where you're going with that. They're all good, except for "Irene" might hurt sales in NYC :lol:

 

[childofthekorn]

What is all this about AMD not putting any money into R&D compared to Nvidia?

We're talking $1.1 Billion (AMD) vs $1.4 Billion (Nvidia), according to each company's latest annual statement (i.s. Form 10-K). That's a gap for sure, but I think people are overstating the size of that gap here. A smaller company putting more than $1B/yr into R&D is far from neglecting research.

AMD 10-K (see table on p. 48) - https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/2488/000119312515054362/d871455d10k.htm

Nvidia 10-K (see table on p. 47) - http://files.shareholder.com/downloads/AMDA-1XAJD4/291203888x0xS1045810-15-36/1045810/filing.pdf

Although it does appear AMD is far more diversified in terms to branching out into other markets compared to NVIDIA. So Nvidia has Tegra Chips, their new streaming consoles and Video cards. AMD Has APU, server chips, GPU, CPU and semi-customs. Although it might look like its about on par, realistically when spread out, not so much. Not to mention in January of this year they began prioritizing towards their profitable sectors. Although they did state recently they increased R&D for next years products. Some conflicting reports, however nothing a few clicks won't fix.

 

[JackNaylorPE]

From the article: "The Radeon water-cooled R9 Fury X will cost $649 and will be available on June 24."

So, your entire premise of retort is on incorrectly-recalled information. Also, the Fury X is dual Fiji GPUs on HBM, so performance should be more in line with the 295X2 if you're wanting to look at performance, and based on Tom's own review of the 980Ti, the 295X2 quite handily defeats the 980 Ti, so you're incorrect on that count as well (assuming the comparison with 295X2 holds true).

Take the red shaded glasses off and read more carefully.

1. The premise was put forth BEFORE the cost of the card was known.
2. The premise was that I didn't think the card would be successful if it was released at $699.
3. I suggested that for the card to be successful, it would have to be around $639.


Looks like AMD thot so too.

Finally, why is a dual GPU being compared with a single GPU ? Ever heard of "apples and apples " comparisons ?

Dual GPU cards get you bragging rights, but they are rarely bought by enthusiasts since getting two single GPU cards using the same GPUs kick the dual GPU tail w/o exception. Two 970's also beat the 980 Ti, what's the point ?

The performance of Fiji is known and need not be subject to speculation....instead of wishful "pie in the sky" thinking as to what it should be, you can just look at the published performance data. And no, it doesn't get anywhere near the 295x2. Out of the box, it scores mostly between the 980 Ti and the Titan X.

 

[Eggz]

[G]etting two single GPU cards using the same GPUs kick the dual GPU tail w/o exception.

Almost. The R9 295x2 was faster than two R9 290Xs.

 

[JackNaylorPE]

Depends on what you are comparing ? The reference 295x2 came outta the box at 1018 versus the reference 290x's 1000, so yes, the reference 295x2 was faster than the 290x "outta the box". But because dual GPU cards are limited thermally, the factory overclocked models reversed this. And on top of that

The 295x2 @ 1018MHz is certainly faster than the reference 1000 MHz cards.... but certainly not faster than say the Gigabyte 1040 MHz cards.

The minute you open up Afterburner, the 295X2 shows it's limitations

Over at Techpowerup, the 295X2 gets to 1120 ....

MSI R9 290X Lightning made 1170 MHz
Sapphire R9 290X Tri-X OC made 1135 MHz
PowerColor R9 290X PCS+ made 1180 MHz
Reference AMD R9 290X made 1125 MHz

 

[Eggz]

Last message

All true, but still not "without exception." The dual GPU cards are also still pretty damn fast, and they're the only mITX option. Just being fair.

 

[Sakata]

It will be amazing to see AMD to have something competitive with Intel in the windows OS, but I wonder how it will play out on linux, will it just be about equal or will it overtake Intel...