As has been stated somewhere on the site almost daily (today on the twitter feed sidebar); it's been delayed because Ryan Smith has been ill. He's currently hoping to have it finished tomorrow.
For the impatient (and to disspell silly conspiracy theories), scores were posted in bench several days ago.
"it's been delayed because Ryan Smith has been ill."
It is sad that a site as big as AT cannot afford more than a single writer. But then again I suppose it was "just" a flagship product from a tech giant, it is not like this was important or eagerly awaited by a lot of enthusiasts or anything. :)
The reality is that we're a very thin operation. This allows us to be nimble, but also allows us to publish those articles that we're genuinely interested in rather than having to succumb to clickbait to make ends meet. It's not perfect (no system is), but it's better than the alternative.
Idk Ryan, normally I'd agree with you but missing Fury X launch was pretty bad. 960 launch was obviously less high profile but still a pretty glaring hole in the midrange. And that review still isn't published.
Anyways, at this point you probably did AMD a solid lol, Fury X was certainly a forgettable launch from AMD's perspective given the amount of hype leading up to it. Do you still think they launched it "exactly the way they wanted to?"
I've switched to AMD (because of mining and have over a dozen cards) and the Fury really isn't impressing me and might jump back to Geforce, but really hope we can get AMD to stay in business so we can have some nice competition and innovation. Hopefully Ryan can give AMD some light they really need!
Yeah these days mining on AMD GPU's is completely dead, and that was the only relevant reason to buy them over the last few years. nVidia has been killing it since the 600 series dollar-for-dollar in "most" games.
Not really. Until Maxwell, AMD cards still were very competitive, even if they were aging. My Tahiti LE 7870/7950 hybrid was a steal for less than 200€ and may be the card that lasted me the most for its value. And even with the less-than-impressive Fury launch and the big gap in power consumption, AMD cards are still giving at least overall slightly better bang for your bucks in raw performance.
i've gotten a sapphire 7870 GHz OC and was waiting for the Fury (hoping they would release a air cooled version) but now not a chance. i'm getting the 90 Ti. I've got a Silverstone FT03 with a H80i so the water cooling kinda throw it out
You're on 12 gpu related articles in the last 30 days (only one shared with brett), but can't manage a 300 series article for two weeks (and it's written BEFORE launch to up it at NDA release etc correct?) or FuryX article for AMD's two major launches this summer (and sick in summer, sorta odd). That's a pretty big pill to swallow. Quick, someone give me a Heimlich, I'm choking... ;)
Still time to respond to comments too...Tweet etc...but a major review of a HUGE launch (considering the hype that is...seems like no fury at this point, no new era of gaming either) can wait for a week, never mind the 300's ignored too. Ok...
Having said that I did notice Jarred now works at maximumpc...Pretty much insinuated AMD is shoveling them around so fast so nobody can thoroughly vet the card. Ouch.
http://www.maximumpc.com/amd-radeon-fury-x-review/ "We received a card for benchmarking… sort of. The whole of Future US, which includes Maximum PC, PC Gamer, and TechRadar, among others, received one Fury X for testing. We asked for a second, since our GPU testing is done at a different location, but to no avail."
It gets worse, even mentioning others, and only 10 samples for all of europe which according to him is really odd. Not sure why people keep turning hairworks off when it's just amping up tessellation (ok, may notch it down from 64, but off? Developer wanted us to use it) which happens to run REALLY fast on maxwell. How many other games will use tessellation like this in the future?
https://techreport.com/review/28513/amd-radeon-r9-... See Beyond3d benchmarks. Hairworks won't be the only thing doing this I'd say. "The Fury X still manages just over half the throughput of the GTX 980 Ti in TessMark. " Same with Polygon throughput. There are others amd leads in, but this surely shows it isn't Hairworks doing in AMD on witcher3 (or nasty stuff from project cars etc), AMD will just hurt in some stuff period as will NV I guess, but NV seems to get the best of AMD as far as what devs are really doing. Should we be turning stuff off to hide AMD's gpu issues? Would we turn down AMD stuff that highlighted their efficiency in some aspect?
As techreport says: "At the end of the day, the results from these directed tests largely confirm the major contrasts between the Fury X and the GeForce GTX 980 Ti. These two solutions have sharply divergent mixes of resources on tap, not just on paper but in terms of measurable throughput."
Why hide it when it shows for either? Gamers should know how data like this plays in the real world. It would appear games like Project Cars, WOW Warlords of Draenor, Witcher 3 (with hairworks on, IE tessellation up), Wolfenstein New Order, COD Adv Warfare, Dragon Age Inq etc show some of AMD's weaknesses (games showing ~20% advantage here basically even at 4K). AMD has a few themselves, but not as many and not this big of an advantage (mostly 1/2 NV's advantage in them meaning less than 10%). Some of them are losses at one site a win on another too, like Metro LL at toms a loss at 4K for NV, but win at techpowerup etc.
"The game uses DirectX 11 without the conventional approach to tessellation. It uses a deferred rendering engine with a custom Ambient Occlusion technique." Techpowerup's comment on tessellation in project cars game. Again, this shows what I'm talking about. You can turn crap off to hide AMD sucking wind in some attribute. Are all of the games I mentioned doing some form of something we should turn off? NO. https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/R9_Fury_X/... 63fps vs. 45fps in project cars at 4K. Ouch. Dev wanted us to see their effects not turn them off because AMD sucks at it. At 1080p/1440p the gap gets to 20% on more than I listed (GTA5 etc). Wolfenstein doing something too with Id's Tech5 engine (over 20% to, and even 970 topples FuryX in 1440p and lower). Even 980 beats FuryX at 4K. Really the discussion should focus on 1440p since 95% of us are at or below this, which is even worse in these games and adds more, and this is all before OCing (which adds games like thief at 4K etc at 21% for NV). Devs will more often than not program for 75% share vs. 25% (AMD) too and more often then not, just because that is what they are designing on (75-80% of the workstation market owned too, game designers etc).
Back to your comment though, a 390x/FuryX release are clickbait articles you aren't interested in? ;) Your excuse is humorous at best, never mind what it is at worst. D. Lister, Chizow etc are correct. Can't wait for the clickbait FuryX article :) Hard to believe you put up a dozen gpu articles in a month but FuryX couldn't get the time of day over one of them...LOL.
Well, a fast and hastened article to meet the deadline at any price would be kind of clockbait.
When the dedicated reviewer is not available, it's quite honorable to give up the hype deadline and wait until he's well and ready to give us the great article we will certainly have.
One thing I'd like to see in a video card review right now is 2 390s (not x) in crossfire.. no one has done that yet and they look to be a very solid choice for 4k Gaming on price/performance.
On topic. I've been using a lot of MSI stuff of late. Really like how the company is handling things these days.. I do wonder if they got their support up to par. That used to be a issue with them.
I don't read twitter (and block everything from them...LOL, heck I'd be fired for having an account) and just 4K with some obviously not playable and 95% of us playing other resolutions. Sorry not enough.
I get sick and I can't run some benchmarks and write an article for 5 days for a major product launch? Bah. Maybe if I had major surgery and was on morphine drip ;) I hope he has more benchmarks than that as 95% of us run 1440p or less. Since he gives the min for shadow (and avg) I'm assuming the others are avg so I would not want to play much on either card having to turn stuff down, though on 980ti maybe as it adds another 20% from OC that FuryX just can't touch. This is shown in other reviews anyway and I really don't even want to be near 30fps min let alone under it or having to turn stuff down the dev meant for me to see. Between all the other sites you see how many games are really NOT 4K-able.
Considering everyone else had the card for HOURS, pretty impressive Ryan manages to keep it for 5-6 days+ no? Nothing fishy there I guess...So either AMD loves this place or Ryan has magical power no other review site can muster (tomshardware buying their own card to get more time, extremetech, maximumpc, etc etc). Almost every review mentions short time etc. Ran all the benchmarks in one day but writing takes 5? Ok...Not sure I need to read it anyway after the other dozen I already read, but it still makes me LOL. What's the excuse for 300's reviews? Sick for 2 weeks? Open heart surgery? ;) I jest, I jest, honest... :)
What is the point of all these "professional" reviews anyway?
Almost every site that has reviewed the Fury X, seems content with the conclusion that beloved little AMD has equalled "big bad Nvidia", disregarding the Fury's need for a CLC to come close to an air-cooled gpu, the fact that HBM ended up being little more than a marketing gimmick, incredibly poor OC potential, absence of HDMI 2.0, limited DX12 features, and the 4GB limit on a $650 GPU circa 2015. All that, PLUS the added baggage of all the older issues that brought AMD's financial position to where it is today.
But hey forget all that - let's just celebrate occasional raw frame-rate parity like David equalling Goliath, sidelining the fact that the guy who built Nvidia from ground up is an ex AMD employee, and AMD is small only because it has never been good enough to be big.
Eh, while its disappointing to see no review, still, from Anandtech, I wouldn't go as far as to question Ryan's integrity on matters of health. Hope he gets better, I do believe he was sick for a prolonged period before that caused him to miss a deadline in the past as well. At the end of the day, it is just video cards we are talking about here. :)
You guys did get a product with Nahimic in it, but I don't see any "going through the details" kind of thing in the said review. Was looking forward to see what they are bringing to the audio table instead of those useless Creative Software.
I've been coming to Anandtech since day one.. and it certainly hasn't died. No where close. Nor has it gone down hill. It's always retained that certain something that keeps many of us coming back.
I've also been here since day one. I still think the site is top notch, but the advertising has been getting way more intrusive lately. The fake menu ad in the upper right and the popup on entry are examples.
I really hate intrusive advertising, to the point where I use ComSkip to watch TV, and pay Pandora to have ad-free radio. I don't run adblock in my browser though, because I want sites to survive. But if the ads get so intrusive that I don't enjoy coming here, my visiting habits will change.
Oh geez it looks like MSI gave their interns free reign on the 3D printers and Papier-mâché kits this summer.
Some of that stuff is really tacky though, "Godlike" and I guess we also see why dated SLI bridges are never going to go away. They've just become a new accessory for Nvidia and AIBs to cash in on.
The original GS30 dock with a bios update in the notebook supports optimus through the internal display so without any wonky cables you get the full gaming experience, it works flawlessly with the Titan-x
So, I'm a pretty big fan of this AiO with dGPU slot. I'll wait until there's a 24" 2160P panel option available before I seriously consider a purchase, but with the right panel and a mid-tier FirePro / Quadra GPU, this could be a seriously potent compact workstation for a lot less $$$ than the 5K iMac. With all my primary Adobe tools (Photoshop, Lightroom, Illustrator and Première) now GPU-accelerated I don't think the mobile i7 would be a big bottleneck and the whole thing would sure put out a lot less heat than my current workstation (OC'd FX8350 & 290X)
5 days and still no Fury X review? How hard is it for an AMD portal site to get a card? Still no 300 series reviews at all and those are two weeks old. The benchmarks are already everywhere else so what gives? I guess I get it, since it seems pretty tough to get some benchmarks they win in. 5 days later only 4 reviews on amazon (on hates it, none of them VERIFIED purchases) and a single review at newegg (a 2nd admits he doesn't have it...ROFL) and not VERIFIED either. Maximum PC could only get one card for a very short time for 4 sister sites, tomshardware getting their own card since they didn't even have a whole day with it, among others saying very short time with one. But if you read enough sites you get enough games and points of view to see it wasn't worth the wait and HBM (as I suspected) had no bearing on things even at 4K. I mean at 8.9B transistors (a billion more than 980ti) and a LOT more bandwidth I expect a 4K sweep especially using more watts too. Heck with AMD's slide showing a dozen games with fury x beating 980ti I expected a sweep at all resolutions. Advertising a 500w water cooler when everyone has trouble hitting 10% (and techpowerup among others show you only get 5% for that 10% and most couldn't hit the 10% anyway, IE extremetech failed to hit 4.7% OC) is another problem. Using 66w playing a bluray at techpower vs. 14w for 980ti sounds like Nvidia shield tv vs. xbox1/ps4 for this task.
Hexus, techreport, hardocp, legitreviews (check here for OC FuryX vs. OC 980ti -WOW that's ugly), pcper, hardwarecanucks, hothardware, maximumpc, hardwareheaven, techpowerup etc, shows it's pretty tough to write a pro AMD article without looking kind of silly on this part. Good luck Ryan ;) People are claiming they have whining cards in the wild too (amazon), so is it really fixed for retail? Note no review yet is VERIFIED so not even sure they've shipped at amazon or newegg though the amazon xfx card is showing 1-3 months before shipping (and it's the only reviewed card, with 4, one hating it), so maybe they shipped a few in that brand. Sapphire the only maker having a $650 price and not in stock anywhere. AMD supposedly claimed to some sites it would sell for $509 in europe but I can't see how. Are they not aware at AMD that euro to dollar is far closer today? Is that british pound and not euro? That's about $800 usd. In euro it's $571 (Either way kind of weird but I think brits pay more for NV too so maybe not so strange). It looks like they can barely get enough out the door for a few hours of reviewing and many stores seem to be waiting for their first shipments for multiple brands. No DVI or HDMI 2.0. Multiple sites reporting pump whine and coil noise from the cooling system. I could go on but you can all read the benchmarks yourselves (and I advise you do before buying!). This card is not what was hyped IMHO.
http://wccftech.com/amd-20nm-gpus-horizon-tsmc-ram... Heck I 1/2 thought this chip was 20nm with all the bragging they did. “20nm is an important node for us. We will be shipping products in 20nm next year and as we move forward […],” said Lisa Su" She goes on to say 20nm plays a part in all of their businesses (pro graphics too). Well when? 390 turned into a rebadge and fiji turned into not enough and 28nm.
There is only a few more sites I read (for major parts anyway that I am actually pondering purchasing) so you guys are almost last. Ouch. Not impressed with anandtech here, OR FuryX.
http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/graphics/2015/06/... One more review. Yet another review showing 10% of less (8%) and netting far less than the OC in actual results. Most seem to get half of the OC, while NV will give you 20% basically straight up for 20% (see legitreviews for example or any 980ti card with Ocing included). From Bit-tech: "The overclocking results are rather disappointing; we only managed to squeeze between 2 and 5 percent more from the card. This is in comparison to our GTX 980 Ti, where we saw gains of around 20 percent"
Wccftech says AMD has admitted it shipped production units with the whine and it should be fixed on future units (ok, so some unlucky users WILL hear this? Surely they RMA so how long before you play with your card?). Just noticed they updated the article saying early production units HAVE it. Normally wouldn't quote those guys but it explains the amazon guy I guess and AMD's own words from Su and the other AMD guy so not exactly rumors here. Again, good luck to Ryan explaining all of this stuff. I have ultimate faith he's whipping up his best spin ;) It's not a bad card, but the problem for AMD is the competition is NOT radeon 290x as most seem to end up comparing it to end the end after seeing their benchmarks (well, it's a massive leap over 290x...Whatever). You need to beat the OTHER guys stuff, not just your own.
Ryan has explained it multiple times already. They've run the benchmarks, you can see the numbers now in Bench. The article is missing because Ryan is ill.
In the original UT, Godlike is the highest accolade, there is no "wicked sick". This also seems to assume the being wicked is more impressive than being a God, hmm...
All you people whining about the Fury X review, and MSI...shut the hell up and go read TOMSHARDWARE because they have a review !
I'm sure Ryan has to get all his other stuff caught up as well as the review. Pretty sure they don't keep him on staff for the couple times a year there is real GPU news.
Have a heart folks. People get sick and will need time to recover. If you need to see how Fury X performs, there are tonnes of reviews out there that pretty much conclude the performance. Fury X no doubt is a big thing, but I see no point rushing a half baked review and get a lot of complains about it anyway. To be honest, I feel I am more interested in the way Anandtech performs a deep dive into in their product features and not just quick on jumping into benchmarking performance like some sites do.
No uITX Z190 option from MSI? That sucks. I have an NCASE M1 order coming with the intent to build a Skylake-based server. Was hoping that MSI would have an ITX Z190 option with Skylake release, but it looks unlikely given the lack of a preview mobo here.
People really need to stop complaining about the missing article. Ryan has already explained himself perfectly:
'The reality is that we're a very thin operation. This allows us to be nimble, but also allows us to publish those articles that we're genuinely interested in rather than having to succumb to clickbait to make ends meet. It's not perfect (no system is), but it's better than the alternative.'
So if you people want those types of site, go to those sites. I'm sad I can't read the review as well, but I can wait because Anand still produces awesome articles and Ryan has said he is sick. Maybe he just has a cold and is lazy; maybe he's dying of a severe flu and can't get near the computer for more than 5 minutes at a time: I don't care as it's not my business. We should just respect that I'm sure Ryan is doing the best we can and stop saying such ridiculous stuff as I've read in this comment thread.
Do people really want those glowing things inside their computer? I mean, when I buy the components I look that it's kind of aesthetically pleasing to my eye, but when I look at most of these "gaming" boards I'm really close enough to barf.
The reason I like this site is because they often dive into details that no other site does. I would be very interested in what anandtech plans on showing us in their Fury X review that everyone else hasn't yet.
We’ve updated our terms. By continuing to use the site and/or by logging into your account, you agree to the Site’s updated Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
50 Comments
Back to Article
Turbinz - Monday, June 29, 2015 - link
Where is the Radeon Fury X review??? This site is a day late and a dollar short.Morawka - Monday, June 29, 2015 - link
AMD is a sponsor so they are probably giving amd time to optimize a driver that reduces image quality to increase benchmark scores.DanNeely - Monday, June 29, 2015 - link
As has been stated somewhere on the site almost daily (today on the twitter feed sidebar); it's been delayed because Ryan Smith has been ill. He's currently hoping to have it finished tomorrow.For the impatient (and to disspell silly conspiracy theories), scores were posted in bench several days ago.
Here is the Fury X (OCed version) vs the GTX 980 Ti.
http://anandtech.com/bench/product/1514?vs=1496
D. Lister - Monday, June 29, 2015 - link
"it's been delayed because Ryan Smith has been ill."It is sad that a site as big as AT cannot afford more than a single writer. But then again I suppose it was "just" a flagship product from a tech giant, it is not like this was important or eagerly awaited by a lot of enthusiasts or anything. :)
Ryan Smith - Monday, June 29, 2015 - link
The reality is that we're a very thin operation. This allows us to be nimble, but also allows us to publish those articles that we're genuinely interested in rather than having to succumb to clickbait to make ends meet. It's not perfect (no system is), but it's better than the alternative.chizow - Monday, June 29, 2015 - link
Idk Ryan, normally I'd agree with you but missing Fury X launch was pretty bad. 960 launch was obviously less high profile but still a pretty glaring hole in the midrange. And that review still isn't published.Anyways, at this point you probably did AMD a solid lol, Fury X was certainly a forgettable launch from AMD's perspective given the amount of hype leading up to it. Do you still think they launched it "exactly the way they wanted to?"
grrrgrrr - Monday, June 29, 2015 - link
Missing a launch where reviews just raise doubts is not a bad thing. A genuine review (and also GPU) is worth a thousand quick ones.Byte - Monday, June 29, 2015 - link
I've switched to AMD (because of mining and have over a dozen cards) and the Fury really isn't impressing me and might jump back to Geforce, but really hope we can get AMD to stay in business so we can have some nice competition and innovation. Hopefully Ryan can give AMD some light they really need!Samus - Monday, June 29, 2015 - link
Yeah these days mining on AMD GPU's is completely dead, and that was the only relevant reason to buy them over the last few years. nVidia has been killing it since the 600 series dollar-for-dollar in "most" games.nightbringer57 - Tuesday, June 30, 2015 - link
Not really.Until Maxwell, AMD cards still were very competitive, even if they were aging.
My Tahiti LE 7870/7950 hybrid was a steal for less than 200€ and may be the card that lasted me the most for its value. And even with the less-than-impressive Fury launch and the big gap in power consumption, AMD cards are still giving at least overall slightly better bang for your bucks in raw performance.
medi03 - Tuesday, June 30, 2015 - link
Fanobi Bullshit.In fall 2013 $399 R9 290 was on par nVidias $999 GTX Titan.
R9 290X was the fastest single card GPU (550$) until 780 Titan (699$).
It's still damn good bung for the buck card, staying within 10% of nVidia's card that costs nearly twice as much.
Fury X is whole new story, 1199$ crossfire beating 1998$ Titan X SLI.
And then there is $599 R9 295x2, which wipes the floor with any single card out there in pretty much any game that wasn't released just yesterday.
Antronman - Sunday, July 5, 2015 - link
Ti stands for titanium.Shadow7037932 - Tuesday, June 30, 2015 - link
Mining on GPUs has been dead for quite a long time, esp. with ASICs available now.will1956 - Thursday, July 9, 2015 - link
i've gotten a sapphire 7870 GHz OC and was waiting for the Fury (hoping they would release a air cooled version) but now not a chance. i'm getting the 90 Ti.I've got a Silverstone FT03 with a H80i so the water cooling kinda throw it out
will1956 - Thursday, July 9, 2015 - link
*980 Ti.TheJian - Monday, June 29, 2015 - link
You're on 12 gpu related articles in the last 30 days (only one shared with brett), but can't manage a 300 series article for two weeks (and it's written BEFORE launch to up it at NDA release etc correct?) or FuryX article for AMD's two major launches this summer (and sick in summer, sorta odd). That's a pretty big pill to swallow. Quick, someone give me a Heimlich, I'm choking... ;)Still time to respond to comments too...Tweet etc...but a major review of a HUGE launch (considering the hype that is...seems like no fury at this point, no new era of gaming either) can wait for a week, never mind the 300's ignored too. Ok...
Having said that I did notice Jarred now works at maximumpc...Pretty much insinuated AMD is shoveling them around so fast so nobody can thoroughly vet the card. Ouch.
http://www.maximumpc.com/amd-radeon-fury-x-review/
"We received a card for benchmarking… sort of. The whole of Future US, which includes Maximum PC, PC Gamer, and TechRadar, among others, received one Fury X for testing. We asked for a second, since our GPU testing is done at a different location, but to no avail."
It gets worse, even mentioning others, and only 10 samples for all of europe which according to him is really odd. Not sure why people keep turning hairworks off when it's just amping up tessellation (ok, may notch it down from 64, but off? Developer wanted us to use it) which happens to run REALLY fast on maxwell. How many other games will use tessellation like this in the future?
https://techreport.com/review/28513/amd-radeon-r9-...
See Beyond3d benchmarks. Hairworks won't be the only thing doing this I'd say.
"The Fury X still manages just over half the throughput of the GTX 980 Ti in TessMark. "
Same with Polygon throughput. There are others amd leads in, but this surely shows it isn't Hairworks doing in AMD on witcher3 (or nasty stuff from project cars etc), AMD will just hurt in some stuff period as will NV I guess, but NV seems to get the best of AMD as far as what devs are really doing. Should we be turning stuff off to hide AMD's gpu issues? Would we turn down AMD stuff that highlighted their efficiency in some aspect?
As techreport says:
"At the end of the day, the results from these directed tests largely confirm the major contrasts between the Fury X and the GeForce GTX 980 Ti. These two solutions have sharply divergent mixes of resources on tap, not just on paper but in terms of measurable throughput."
Why hide it when it shows for either? Gamers should know how data like this plays in the real world. It would appear games like Project Cars, WOW Warlords of Draenor, Witcher 3 (with hairworks on, IE tessellation up), Wolfenstein New Order, COD Adv Warfare, Dragon Age Inq etc show some of AMD's weaknesses (games showing ~20% advantage here basically even at 4K). AMD has a few themselves, but not as many and not this big of an advantage (mostly 1/2 NV's advantage in them meaning less than 10%). Some of them are losses at one site a win on another too, like Metro LL at toms a loss at 4K for NV, but win at techpowerup etc.
"The game uses DirectX 11 without the conventional approach to tessellation. It uses a deferred rendering engine with a custom Ambient Occlusion technique."
Techpowerup's comment on tessellation in project cars game. Again, this shows what I'm talking about. You can turn crap off to hide AMD sucking wind in some attribute. Are all of the games I mentioned doing some form of something we should turn off? NO.
https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/R9_Fury_X/...
63fps vs. 45fps in project cars at 4K. Ouch. Dev wanted us to see their effects not turn them off because AMD sucks at it. At 1080p/1440p the gap gets to 20% on more than I listed (GTA5 etc). Wolfenstein doing something too with Id's Tech5 engine (over 20% to, and even 970 topples FuryX in 1440p and lower). Even 980 beats FuryX at 4K. Really the discussion should focus on 1440p since 95% of us are at or below this, which is even worse in these games and adds more, and this is all before OCing (which adds games like thief at 4K etc at 21% for NV). Devs will more often than not program for 75% share vs. 25% (AMD) too and more often then not, just because that is what they are designing on (75-80% of the workstation market owned too, game designers etc).
Back to your comment though, a 390x/FuryX release are clickbait articles you aren't interested in? ;) Your excuse is humorous at best, never mind what it is at worst. D. Lister, Chizow etc are correct. Can't wait for the clickbait FuryX article :) Hard to believe you put up a dozen gpu articles in a month but FuryX couldn't get the time of day over one of them...LOL.
nightbringer57 - Tuesday, June 30, 2015 - link
Well, a fast and hastened article to meet the deadline at any price would be kind of clockbait.When the dedicated reviewer is not available, it's quite honorable to give up the hype deadline and wait until he's well and ready to give us the great article we will certainly have.
mmrezaie - Tuesday, June 30, 2015 - link
Thanks Ryan. I would prefer to have better in depth review than an ad like article. So get better soon.D. Lister - Tuesday, June 30, 2015 - link
Ah, well then, the silver lining maybe a more in-depth analysis, considering the absence of a strict deadline. Get well soon mate.just4U - Wednesday, July 1, 2015 - link
One thing I'd like to see in a video card review right now is 2 390s (not x) in crossfire.. no one has done that yet and they look to be a very solid choice for 4k Gaming on price/performance.On topic. I've been using a lot of MSI stuff of late. Really like how the company is handling things these days.. I do wonder if they got their support up to par. That used to be a issue with them.
Samus - Monday, June 29, 2015 - link
The site has multiple "writers" but they specialize in certain areas of technology.TheJian - Monday, June 29, 2015 - link
I don't read twitter (and block everything from them...LOL, heck I'd be fired for having an account) and just 4K with some obviously not playable and 95% of us playing other resolutions. Sorry not enough.I get sick and I can't run some benchmarks and write an article for 5 days for a major product launch? Bah. Maybe if I had major surgery and was on morphine drip ;) I hope he has more benchmarks than that as 95% of us run 1440p or less. Since he gives the min for shadow (and avg) I'm assuming the others are avg so I would not want to play much on either card having to turn stuff down, though on 980ti maybe as it adds another 20% from OC that FuryX just can't touch. This is shown in other reviews anyway and I really don't even want to be near 30fps min let alone under it or having to turn stuff down the dev meant for me to see. Between all the other sites you see how many games are really NOT 4K-able.
Considering everyone else had the card for HOURS, pretty impressive Ryan manages to keep it for 5-6 days+ no? Nothing fishy there I guess...So either AMD loves this place or Ryan has magical power no other review site can muster (tomshardware buying their own card to get more time, extremetech, maximumpc, etc etc). Almost every review mentions short time etc. Ran all the benchmarks in one day but writing takes 5? Ok...Not sure I need to read it anyway after the other dozen I already read, but it still makes me LOL. What's the excuse for 300's reviews? Sick for 2 weeks? Open heart surgery? ;) I jest, I jest, honest... :)
D. Lister - Tuesday, June 30, 2015 - link
What is the point of all these "professional" reviews anyway?Almost every site that has reviewed the Fury X, seems content with the conclusion that beloved little AMD has equalled "big bad Nvidia", disregarding the Fury's need for a CLC to come close to an air-cooled gpu, the fact that HBM ended up being little more than a marketing gimmick, incredibly poor OC potential, absence of HDMI 2.0, limited DX12 features, and the 4GB limit on a $650 GPU circa 2015. All that, PLUS the added baggage of all the older issues that brought AMD's financial position to where it is today.
But hey forget all that - let's just celebrate occasional raw frame-rate parity like David equalling Goliath, sidelining the fact that the guy who built Nvidia from ground up is an ex AMD employee, and AMD is small only because it has never been good enough to be big.
chizow - Wednesday, July 1, 2015 - link
Great points, fully agree.chizow - Wednesday, July 1, 2015 - link
Eh, while its disappointing to see no review, still, from Anandtech, I wouldn't go as far as to question Ryan's integrity on matters of health. Hope he gets better, I do believe he was sick for a prolonged period before that caused him to miss a deadline in the past as well. At the end of the day, it is just video cards we are talking about here. :)squngy - Tuesday, June 30, 2015 - link
http://anandtech.com/bench/product/1496?vs=1514fixed the link for you
eriri-el - Monday, June 29, 2015 - link
You guys did get a product with Nahimic in it, but I don't see any "going through the details" kind of thing in the said review. Was looking forward to see what they are bringing to the audio table instead of those useless Creative Software.waldoh - Monday, June 29, 2015 - link
Thanks for the late report on these msi boards. There isn't about 100 youtube videos of tech news reporters who actually give a shit.This site died when Anand left. The management really needs to be fired, its pathetic.
Thank god for the forums, ananadtechs one savior.
waldoh - Monday, June 29, 2015 - link
Also, these pictures look like screen grabs, so not even original content.Ian Cutress - Tuesday, June 30, 2015 - link
Certainly not screen grabs. If the exif data has been retained, it'll show my name and the Pentax I used to take the images.Ananadtech ? Steve, is that you?
Ian Cutress - Tuesday, June 30, 2015 - link
I should point out that if you go beyond page 1 (yes shock, there's more than one page) there's a selection of AIOs, laptops and others.just4U - Wednesday, July 1, 2015 - link
"The site died when Anand left.."------
I've been coming to Anandtech since day one.. and it certainly hasn't died. No where close. Nor has it gone down hill. It's always retained that certain something that keeps many of us coming back.
barleyguy - Wednesday, July 1, 2015 - link
I've also been here since day one. I still think the site is top notch, but the advertising has been getting way more intrusive lately. The fake menu ad in the upper right and the popup on entry are examples.I really hate intrusive advertising, to the point where I use ComSkip to watch TV, and pay Pandora to have ad-free radio. I don't run adblock in my browser though, because I want sites to survive. But if the ads get so intrusive that I don't enjoy coming here, my visiting habits will change.
</rant off>
chizow - Monday, June 29, 2015 - link
Oh geez it looks like MSI gave their interns free reign on the 3D printers and Papier-mâché kits this summer.Some of that stuff is really tacky though, "Godlike" and I guess we also see why dated SLI bridges are never going to go away. They've just become a new accessory for Nvidia and AIBs to cash in on.
junky77 - Monday, June 29, 2015 - link
GT72 with GSync is already here.. GT72 2QD with GSync is already sellingMeaker10 - Monday, June 29, 2015 - link
The original GS30 dock with a bios update in the notebook supports optimus through the internal display so without any wonky cables you get the full gaming experience, it works flawlessly with the Titan-xKateH - Monday, June 29, 2015 - link
So, I'm a pretty big fan of this AiO with dGPU slot. I'll wait until there's a 24" 2160P panel option available before I seriously consider a purchase, but with the right panel and a mid-tier FirePro / Quadra GPU, this could be a seriously potent compact workstation for a lot less $$$ than the 5K iMac. With all my primary Adobe tools (Photoshop, Lightroom, Illustrator and Première) now GPU-accelerated I don't think the mobile i7 would be a big bottleneck and the whole thing would sure put out a lot less heat than my current workstation (OC'd FX8350 & 290X)TheJian - Monday, June 29, 2015 - link
5 days and still no Fury X review? How hard is it for an AMD portal site to get a card? Still no 300 series reviews at all and those are two weeks old. The benchmarks are already everywhere else so what gives? I guess I get it, since it seems pretty tough to get some benchmarks they win in. 5 days later only 4 reviews on amazon (on hates it, none of them VERIFIED purchases) and a single review at newegg (a 2nd admits he doesn't have it...ROFL) and not VERIFIED either. Maximum PC could only get one card for a very short time for 4 sister sites, tomshardware getting their own card since they didn't even have a whole day with it, among others saying very short time with one. But if you read enough sites you get enough games and points of view to see it wasn't worth the wait and HBM (as I suspected) had no bearing on things even at 4K. I mean at 8.9B transistors (a billion more than 980ti) and a LOT more bandwidth I expect a 4K sweep especially using more watts too. Heck with AMD's slide showing a dozen games with fury x beating 980ti I expected a sweep at all resolutions. Advertising a 500w water cooler when everyone has trouble hitting 10% (and techpowerup among others show you only get 5% for that 10% and most couldn't hit the 10% anyway, IE extremetech failed to hit 4.7% OC) is another problem. Using 66w playing a bluray at techpower vs. 14w for 980ti sounds like Nvidia shield tv vs. xbox1/ps4 for this task.Hexus, techreport, hardocp, legitreviews (check here for OC FuryX vs. OC 980ti -WOW that's ugly), pcper, hardwarecanucks, hothardware, maximumpc, hardwareheaven, techpowerup etc, shows it's pretty tough to write a pro AMD article without looking kind of silly on this part. Good luck Ryan ;) People are claiming they have whining cards in the wild too (amazon), so is it really fixed for retail? Note no review yet is VERIFIED so not even sure they've shipped at amazon or newegg though the amazon xfx card is showing 1-3 months before shipping (and it's the only reviewed card, with 4, one hating it), so maybe they shipped a few in that brand. Sapphire the only maker having a $650 price and not in stock anywhere. AMD supposedly claimed to some sites it would sell for $509 in europe but I can't see how. Are they not aware at AMD that euro to dollar is far closer today? Is that british pound and not euro? That's about $800 usd. In euro it's $571 (Either way kind of weird but I think brits pay more for NV too so maybe not so strange). It looks like they can barely get enough out the door for a few hours of reviewing and many stores seem to be waiting for their first shipments for multiple brands. No DVI or HDMI 2.0. Multiple sites reporting pump whine and coil noise from the cooling system. I could go on but you can all read the benchmarks yourselves (and I advise you do before buying!). This card is not what was hyped IMHO.
http://wccftech.com/amd-20nm-gpus-horizon-tsmc-ram...
Heck I 1/2 thought this chip was 20nm with all the bragging they did.
“20nm is an important node for us. We will be shipping products in 20nm next year and as we move forward […],” said Lisa Su"
She goes on to say 20nm plays a part in all of their businesses (pro graphics too). Well when? 390 turned into a rebadge and fiji turned into not enough and 28nm.
http://wccftech.com/amd-radeon-fury-x-reportedly-s...
Is the whine gone or not? Will the nano come with a 2.0 HDMI port for living room TV's?
There is only a few more sites I read (for major parts anyway that I am actually pondering purchasing) so you guys are almost last. Ouch. Not impressed with anandtech here, OR FuryX.
http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/graphics/2015/06/...
One more review. Yet another review showing 10% of less (8%) and netting far less than the OC in actual results. Most seem to get half of the OC, while NV will give you 20% basically straight up for 20% (see legitreviews for example or any 980ti card with Ocing included). From Bit-tech:
"The overclocking results are rather disappointing; we only managed to squeeze between 2 and 5 percent more from the card. This is in comparison to our GTX 980 Ti, where we saw gains of around 20 percent"
Wccftech says AMD has admitted it shipped production units with the whine and it should be fixed on future units (ok, so some unlucky users WILL hear this? Surely they RMA so how long before you play with your card?). Just noticed they updated the article saying early production units HAVE it. Normally wouldn't quote those guys but it explains the amazon guy I guess and AMD's own words from Su and the other AMD guy so not exactly rumors here. Again, good luck to Ryan explaining all of this stuff. I have ultimate faith he's whipping up his best spin ;) It's not a bad card, but the problem for AMD is the competition is NOT radeon 290x as most seem to end up comparing it to end the end after seeing their benchmarks (well, it's a massive leap over 290x...Whatever). You need to beat the OTHER guys stuff, not just your own.
Gigaplex - Monday, June 29, 2015 - link
Ryan has explained it multiple times already. They've run the benchmarks, you can see the numbers now in Bench. The article is missing because Ryan is ill.yefi - Monday, June 29, 2015 - link
In the original UT, Godlike is the highest accolade, there is no "wicked sick". This also seems to assume the being wicked is more impressive than being a God, hmm...royalcrown - Monday, June 29, 2015 - link
All you people whining about the Fury X review, and MSI...shut the hell up and go read TOMSHARDWARE because they have a review !I'm sure Ryan has to get all his other stuff caught up as well as the review. Pretty sure they don't keep him on staff for the couple times a year there is real GPU news.
watzupken - Monday, June 29, 2015 - link
Have a heart folks. People get sick and will need time to recover. If you need to see how Fury X performs, there are tonnes of reviews out there that pretty much conclude the performance. Fury X no doubt is a big thing, but I see no point rushing a half baked review and get a lot of complains about it anyway. To be honest, I feel I am more interested in the way Anandtech performs a deep dive into in their product features and not just quick on jumping into benchmarking performance like some sites do.bznotins - Monday, June 29, 2015 - link
No uITX Z190 option from MSI? That sucks. I have an NCASE M1 order coming with the intent to build a Skylake-based server. Was hoping that MSI would have an ITX Z190 option with Skylake release, but it looks unlikely given the lack of a preview mobo here.SirCanealot - Tuesday, June 30, 2015 - link
People really need to stop complaining about the missing article. Ryan has already explained himself perfectly:'The reality is that we're a very thin operation. This allows us to be nimble, but also allows us to publish those articles that we're genuinely interested in rather than having to succumb to clickbait to make ends meet. It's not perfect (no system is), but it's better than the alternative.'
So if you people want those types of site, go to those sites. I'm sad I can't read the review as well, but I can wait because Anand still produces awesome articles and Ryan has said he is sick. Maybe he just has a cold and is lazy; maybe he's dying of a severe flu and can't get near the computer for more than 5 minutes at a time: I don't care as it's not my business. We should just respect that I'm sure Ryan is doing the best we can and stop saying such ridiculous stuff as I've read in this comment thread.
Get well soon, dude! :)
FMinus - Tuesday, June 30, 2015 - link
Do people really want those glowing things inside their computer? I mean, when I buy the components I look that it's kind of aesthetically pleasing to my eye, but when I look at most of these "gaming" boards I'm really close enough to barf.erple2 - Tuesday, June 30, 2015 - link
"yellow and black construction suit modification."Come on! Seriously??? Kids these days!
That's the badass power loader driven into freaking awesomeness by Ripley.
awktane - Wednesday, July 1, 2015 - link
The reason I like this site is because they often dive into details that no other site does. I would be very interested in what anandtech plans on showing us in their Fury X review that everyone else hasn't yet.dmacfour - Wednesday, July 1, 2015 - link
Are there no employees at MSI with an art/design background?The "Godlike" is the ugliest motherboard I've ever seen. That booth dragon looks like a middle school art class project.
eugenbaudeer - Monday, October 25, 2021 - link
submit a new generation laptopseugenbaudeer - Monday, October 25, 2021 - link
awesome