Overclock.net › Forums › Graphics Cards › AMD/ATI › Powercolor R9 Fury =/=Fury X?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Powercolor R9 Fury =/=Fury X?

post #1 of 14
Thread Starter 
I will be buying a new card within the next week or two and we heavily leaning to the Nano (dropped price) or the Fury X. In discussing this with Painkiller yesterday, I believe he is correct that the Fury is sufficient if I'm apprehensive about spending the money on a Fury X AND a new water block to add it to the loop. (I'm not modding my core P5 for the stock rad and short tubes...never been very good at that).

So the middle ground is this. http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814131677
But wait.....this is a Fury X. Or....a Nano with a smaller power envelope. Surely this can be OC'd to a Fury X....right?
Only I cant find anyone that has done this....or attempted it for that matter. I also can't seem to find if this has a dual BIOS.
Since you ALL here know more than I do (I am respectfully humble), what do you guys think?
post #2 of 14
One of the pics on the Newegg site shows the Bios switch, you just need to zoom in a bunch. I have both the Nano and the Fury X, and I think the Nano is a really good card if you can find one in the low $400-$380 or a Fury X for around $500-$550. The problem with the Nano is the throttling profile built into the Bios. I have flashed my Nano with the Fury X bios and the throttle is gone, but it lacks in performance due to unknown parameter differences. However a Nano with default bios can be over clocked to default Fury X levels, within 1% based on fire stike scores. From my understanding though, the Fury may have some of the cores locked, where the Nano and Fury X have all cores unlocked.
post #3 of 14
Non-X Fury has 3584 shaders compared to Fury X/Nano 4096 shaders. The rest is the same. Its performance can easily equal a Fury X with a little bit of overclocking. If you want air cooled, I would go with a regular Fury. The Nano is alright but it has its own drawbacks.

I would highly suggest you look at the Sapphire Nitro cards unless you need to water cool, they have a full custom PCB and are much less prone to coil noise than the reference based cards (Sapphire Tri-X/XFX/Powercolor) and are cheaper currently than that powercolor model you linked.
post #4 of 14
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scorpion49 View Post

Non-X Fury has 3584 shaders compared to Fury X/Nano 4096 shaders. The rest is the same. Its performance can easily equal a Fury X with a little bit of overclocking. If you want air cooled, I would go with a regular Fury. The Nano is alright but it has its own drawbacks.

I would highly suggest you look at the Sapphire Nitro cards unless you need to water cool, they have a full custom PCB and are much less prone to coil noise than the reference based cards (Sapphire Tri-X/XFX/Powercolor) and are cheaper currently than that powercolor model you linked.

That's a big negative there Ghost Rider. This Fury does in fact have 4096. That's why I was curious about flashing it to a Fury X
post #5 of 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by HexagonRabbit View Post

That's a big negative there Ghost Rider. This Fury does in fact have 4096. That's why I was curious about flashing it to a Fury X

SOME of the Furies have shaders BIOS locked, others have them fused. I've owned 7 of them already, I've unlocked shaders on a few. Very, very few can unlock all 64 CU without issue and performance suffers with asymmetrical CU count due to the way AMD's shader engine works. But obviously you already knew everything about the subject, so good luck.
post #6 of 14
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scorpion49 View Post

SOME of the Furies have shaders BIOS locked, others have them fused. I've owned 7 of them already, I've unlocked shaders on a few. Very, very few can unlock all 64 CU without issue and performance suffers with asymmetrical CU count due to the way AMD's shader engine works. But obviously you already knew everything about the subject, so good luck.
My apologies. I wasn't trying to be condescending. Having 7 would make you the authority, And yes I do need to watercool it. Open air case + indiana humidity in the summer.

I also haven't heard much about this specific card.
post #7 of 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by HexagonRabbit View Post

My apologies. I wasn't trying to be condescending. Having 7 would make you the authority, And yes I do need to watercool it. Open air case + indiana humidity in the summer.

I'm nowhere near the authority, I've just played with some of them (there is a whole thread about unlocking here somewhere). If you're going to water cool, I would maybe go with a Nano. With a Fury you're taking a big gamble if it will unlock at all, or even unlock all of the CU at this point, they've started fusing the cores off instead of BIOS locking them. The best I've had was 60/64 and the performance was not much better than the original configuration.
post #8 of 14
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by HexagonRabbit View Post

My apologies. I wasn't trying to be condescending. Having 7 would make you the authority, And yes I do need to watercool it. Open air case + indiana humidity in the summer.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scorpion49 View Post

I'm nowhere near the authority, I've just played with some of them (there is a whole thread about unlocking here somewhere). If you're going to water cool, I would maybe go with a Nano. With a Fury you're taking a big gamble if it will unlock at all, or even unlock all of the CU at this point, they've started fusing the cores off instead of BIOS locking them. The best I've had was 60/64 and the performance was not much better than the original configuration.

Very interesting. I have never been more torn on a GPU than I am with these.
post #9 of 14
I dont think the Nano is worth watercooling until the Fury X bios can be edited to work on the Nano. The throttling profile is still the limitation with the Nano bios.
post #10 of 14
I feel like the product description of that Powercolor is wrong, Fury doesn't have 4096 shaders, only Fury X or Nano.

Looking at Powercolors site it only lists memory bus at 4096-bit, non of their descriptions list how many shaders so NewEgg may have gotten it wrong.

I'm curious where you are finding the facts to back up this PowerColor Fury having 4096 Shaders, it just doesn't make sense.
D
(15 items)
 
The Sheep Skinner
(13 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel i7 6700 Gigabyte Z170N-Gaming5 Sapphire Radeon R9 Fury Tri-X 3840 G.Skill TridentZ  
Hard DriveCoolingCoolingCooling
960 EVO 500GB EK SE 240mm, Magicool slim 240mm EK Supreme HF CU Gold EKFC-Fury X WB 
OSMonitorPowerCase
Win 10 Pro Acer XG270HU EVGA 750W  Evolv ITX 
MouseMouse Pad
Naos7000 Corsair MM600 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
C2D E8400 DFI LT P35 Radeon HD4890 OCZ 2GB 800MHz 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
500GB Asus multi DVD W7 U Samsung 2232BW+ 
PowerCase
Corsair HX520W CM 690 
  hide details  
Reply
D
(15 items)
 
The Sheep Skinner
(13 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel i7 6700 Gigabyte Z170N-Gaming5 Sapphire Radeon R9 Fury Tri-X 3840 G.Skill TridentZ  
Hard DriveCoolingCoolingCooling
960 EVO 500GB EK SE 240mm, Magicool slim 240mm EK Supreme HF CU Gold EKFC-Fury X WB 
OSMonitorPowerCase
Win 10 Pro Acer XG270HU EVGA 750W  Evolv ITX 
MouseMouse Pad
Naos7000 Corsair MM600 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
C2D E8400 DFI LT P35 Radeon HD4890 OCZ 2GB 800MHz 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
500GB Asus multi DVD W7 U Samsung 2232BW+ 
PowerCase
Corsair HX520W CM 690 
  hide details  
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: AMD/ATI
Overclock.net › Forums › Graphics Cards › AMD/ATI › Powercolor R9 Fury =/=Fury X?