Login Registrieren
Games World
      • Von Pro_PainKiller Komplett-PC-Aufrüster(in)
        Sehe ich nicht so - techPowerUp ist kein Magazin - sondern eine gute bedeutende neutrale & renomierte Hardware & Review Tech-Website!
        Ist wohl ne 'AMD Retourkutsche ' dafür.... Fury-X Fiji OC obwohl nicht erwünscht - AMD Radeon R9 Fury X Voltage Scaling Analyzed – Not A Great Overclocker As Marketed!

        AMD Radeon R9 Fury X Voltage Scaling Analyzed - Not A Great Overclocker As Marketed

        TPU: Voltage control was a feature that was expected to come to Fiji GPUs and TechPowerUp has put a very detailed summary of why it took so long for the R9 Fury X to get software based voltage control after a month of its launch. TechPowerUp @ AMD Overclocker's Dream / https://www.techpowerup.c...

        Fury X Overclocking Failing to Meet Expectations | Pure Overclock

        AMD 300W Radeon Fury X card - wird mit bissel OC zum 500W Voltage Scaling Monster... BF3 @ 53 FPS + 2 FPS ( bei 200Watt GPU Mehrverbrauch)

        When Fury X first released, overclocking was abysmal, but that wasn’t any surprise once it was pointed out that voltage control wasn’t being supported yet. Now however, TechPowerUp seems to have found a breakthrough in the voltage control and plans on releasing software soon for other users. The bad news is, it doesn’t look like AMD understands the phrase “overclocker’s dream” when it comes to Fiji overclocking.

        To begin with, TechPowerUp was able to get a good 60 MHz extra out of the HBM. That isn’t a bad number considering how fresh the technology is and since AMD wasn’t bragging about memory overclocking, it’s a nice bonus. The problem is how little the GPU itself was able to be pushed. The most they could get out of it was an extra 165 MHz while remaining stable. When you do the math, that’s only slightly over a 15% overclock. The good news was that temperatures still remained great, but the power draw on the system raised exponentially. All considering, the extra energy needed only amounted to roughly a 5 FPS gain in gaming. Some minor tweaks in voltage would be fine if you wanted to reach stability but overall, there doesn’t seem to be a worthwhile benefit to pushing the Fury X to the max. Check out the link below to see the scaling in more detail.

        There’s really no way to spin this in a positive light. AMD really dropped the ball by claiming that Fury X would be a “overclocker’s dream.” They obviously don’t understand what that entails but there is absolutely no excuse for this kind of oversight. When looking at how great Maxwell was at overclocking, it should have been painfully obvious what the new expectations were going to be. HBM is a great technology in my opinion, but it needs to be utilized properly to reap the full benefits. DirectX 12 is AMD’s last hope. If the new API can take advantage of those 4096 stream processors, it could give future buyers something very serious to contend with but at the time being, it’s really hard to go with a Fury X when the GTX 980 Ti will offer more, especially with overclocking. Hopefully these shortcomings won’t be representative of Zen but only time will tell.
      • Von markus1612 Lötkolbengott/-göttin
        Und jetzt? Das Magazin labert auch totalen Müll wenns um AMD Karten geht.....
        Hab mir da mal was angeschaut und tw ist das echt lächerlich.
      • Von Pro_PainKiller Komplett-PC-Aufrüster(in)
        Wer glaubt denn heutzutage noch AMD's PR Abteilung... "AMD made performance claims FuryX is 20% faster then 980TI in games - and it's a Overclocker's Dream @ E3 2015" (renomierte US Hardware Reviewseite & Entwickler von TechPowerUp GPU-Z => bekommt keine AMD Radeon R9 Nano zum Review!
        AMD Radeon R9 Nano Review by TPU...Not | techPowerUp

        AMD made a request to make some changes to GPU-Z (which you didn't pay a penny for to begin with and don't have to use) two months ago and because what you want hasn't happened then that is proof that W1zzard is biased against AMD and therefore you are going to spam the news forum endlessly with nonsense to aggravate people until you get your way.

        AMD don't send sample to TPU (TechPowerUp) simply because they know performance summary , performance per dollar , noise , overclocking , Temperature , Value and conclusion and probably negative feedback like throttle all...

        "Well when you seen the settings used, It was clear AMD used settings that Tilt'ed the field in their favor Badly. They used settings that were Shader based and turned everything else off aka no AA and AF to start with. Techreport did a break down of the "benchmarkers review guide" AMD put out and talked about settings they used and explained it pretty well (Linked below). So when they claim Performance of X and you get Y and Y is good 25-30% SLOWER then they claimed, its pretty hard to spin that as a positive."
      • Von Rotavapor Freizeitschrauber(in)
        4GB AMD sind nicht gleich 3,5 GB NV. So einfach ist das.
      • Von thorda Komplett-PC-Käufer(in)
        Ich bin jetzt ein wenig irritiert... ich meine in der jüngsten Vergangenheit gelesen zu haben, das 3,5 GB Speicher absolut ausreichend sind, jetzt muss ich lesen das die Nano NUR 4GB Speicher hat und somit angeblich nicht ausreicht...
        Wie soll ich das verstehen?
  • Print / Abo
    PC Games Hardware 06/2017 PC Games 06/2017 PC Games MMore 06/2017 play³ 06/2017 Games Aktuell 06/2017 buffed 12/2016 XBG Games 04/2017
    PCGH Magazin 06/2017 PC Games 06/2017 PC Games MMORE Computec Kiosk On the Run! Birdies Run
AMD Radeon
Radeon R9 Nano: AMD mit Livestream ab 21 Uhr, Nano hinter Banane versteckt
AMD kündigt seit einigen Tagen einen Livestream speziell zur Radeon R9 Nano an. Heute Abend um 21:00 Uhr wird man über zwei Stunden über die Grafikkarte sprechen. Die Chancen stehen nicht schlecht, dass dabei auch neue Informationen fallen gelassen werden.