2 Likes
Are all the AIB partners launching a Fury card?
If Gigabyte utilizes their cooler that can tackle 600 watts, that has be interested. I wouldn't mind seeing what HiS and XFX produce as well.
Nah, NAH we need to EXPLORE this new possibility!
Is this BETTER?!
Does that look like YOUR ideal FURY?!
2 Likes
Yes it is, thank you.
They should make the Nano like that too, just to be consistent.
(oh wait)
i don't see why people keep complaining about the heatsink overhang. just because the RAM doesn't take up as much space doesn't mean it doesn't put out heat. What i don't get is why they just didn't extend the damn backplate the full length of the card. seems odd.
good points, but they are still to rich for my blood. I am gonna go with a 970 or 390 and rock 1080p till Pascal comes out.
HBM 2.0 (so more than 4GB), 16nm or 14nm process. Then i will upgrade to a newer monitor. It just has to have low input lag. perhaps by then (2 years) there will be a nice, simple gaming 4k monitor for $300-ish. if not, ill settle with 1440p.
One can hope that by then 4K is more attainable. Even now we're looking at what is essentially mid-range hardware that can handle 4K gaming with a few settings off (mainly AA and exuberant lighting). It's about time the peripherals match the pricing of the core hardware.
Because they are blowing air through the heatsink like a radiator. The backplate would just cause interference at that point and wouldn't let the air go through. Basically, radiator with one fan that hangs off the back of the card. The tests show it works, too.
1 Like
The length of the coolers on the cards is a two fold thing in my eyes.
Jayz when reviewing the Fury X commented in the length saying that windowed cases like to show off the most expensive and powerful part of the machine. In that regard visually the short Fury X may be a visual disadvantage. Some people like the short card but others want that length to show off how cool it looks in a case. I figure that is one of the reasons for the long cooler.
The other may be cooling. While the Fiji is meant to be cool, and it is not overly hot by any means, AIB partners might be hedging rhier bets at this early stage and just going for broke with the cooling. The other thing to keep in mind is that at least on the sapphire card it is using standard heat pipes. I would like to imagine that the other coolers like the vapour x will do a much better job dissipating that heat and they will make the coolers shorter to reflect that.
After the lambasting AMD and their partners got over the 290s heat issues at launch this looks to be making sure regardless of if it needs it or not that these cards are cool on launch.
That is just my view on the coolers I have not taken a look at the benches yet.
i dont understand, why they didnt made it a dual fan design.
Honnestly that third fan doesnt realy add much to the cooling performance i think.
1 Like
In my opinion it does add to the cooling exactly the same as the other two fans. It's blowing air over the fins and the heatpipes, why do you think it is not as useful?
1 Like
Probably even better cooling on that section than normal as the air heating up and passing through does not hit the underlying PCB getting trapped and slowed down around the hot pipes but instead just blows straight out and gone.
At the point where the third fan sits, the heat has allready been dissipated from the card it self.
The fan it self just blows through the fins so idk if that realy add anything significant to the heat dissipation.
But it could ofc be, that they have done it to cool down the heatpipes more quickly, that ofc could be.
They wouldn't add more material to the cooler than necessary. That adds to the cost and makes it harder to sell (small cards are becoming more and more common). The cooler works really well and proves to be effective. Sapphire knows what they are doing. The fins after the pcb are acting like the radiator of a cpu cooler or the rad in a liquid cooler set up. The heatpipes, fins, and fans are still doing their job. I have no idea why this seems so difficult to understand for so many people.
I've said that from the very very beginning. it should of been a dual fan design. there was no reason to extend the card like that. people can argue about compatibility issues. or heat issues. but for a card that AMD claims to be efficent. i expect better. if i ever invest onto this card on the future, i'm considering either Gigabyte or MSI's model.
why? the liquid in the heat pipes is allready cooled down by the other 2 fans.
I still dont realy see the benefit of the third fan blowing towards nothing.
The 3 fan design is basicly looks nice.
But other then that i dont see the benefits.
Why have more than one 120mm rad in a custom loop? More fins=more dissipation. I don't see why they wouldn't do this. They needed more heat dissipation, so they added more fins and another fan. More surface area was apparently needed. Hence the great temps. I think that having the fins not under the pcb allows for more air to be blown through (lowers the amount of pressure built up on the other side of the fins), that means more heat dissipated.
Anyway it doesnt realy matter.
Anyway Asus design with a triple fan strix cooler.
This one looks pretty good
Comparing the previous Tri-X cooler designs to the one on the Fury, they look different. Look at the heatpipes taht go to the back of the card. So it isn't like they just slapped the old version onto the Fury. They designed this cooler specifically for the Fury. Adding less material would have cost less (presumably). Could be that it came from a newer card.
290x
Looks like the same cooler that is on the 390x
Fury
