Our "pub" where you can post about things completely Off Topic or about non-silent PC issues.
Moderators: NeilBlanchard, Ralf Hutter, sthayashi, Lawrence Lee
- Posts: 5275
- Joined: Wed Jun 13, 2007 10:12 am
- Location: ITALY
AMD PR refused to have their new Radeon R9 Fury Nano graphic card reviewed by the most respecteful web reviewers around, like Scott Wasson (The TechReport), W1zzard (TechPowerUp!), and Brent Justice (HardOCP), and from what I understood probably because they need only glowing reviews.
I found rather informative the Kyle Bennett's (HardOCP) coverage of that affair.
With reference to me, I'll boycott AMD for at least a year for such a bold move: I think that arrogance won't save AMD from their financial and technology issues.
- Posts: 7503
- Joined: Thu Oct 06, 2005 4:36 am
- Location: St. Louis, MO
Didn't know [H] was also snubbed. I did notice a veritable sea of mediocre sites got the card. This crap usually backfires.
In any case, Scott got a card via another source. So, I look forward to THAT review with a bit of relish.
Another thought on the whole cherry picking low leakage/lower power parts for the Nano. That may really skew the population downward (slower) for standard Fury X OC'ing.
- Posts: 238
- Joined: Sat May 11, 2013 8:33 am
I kind of understand this after reading about the Fury Nano pricing at $649.
That price is just too high to tolerate poor reviews.
I don't know what AMD is up to but the poor availability of Fury cards together with this high price is making it hard to buy when I know 14nm GPUs are around the corner.
I want to buy an AMD card, it just has to have low TDP (Nano was perfect in this respect), low power usage for idle and 2D graphics (Nano is not so good here) and a competitive price (Nano failed hard here).