AMD r9 Fury X

[CygnusXI]

So, I was looking to get my hands on one of these new Fury X gpus clocking in at almost 9 teraflops if I recall, they appear to have been sold out across the board. With all the reported issues of the maxwell cards Im staying far away from those (unless of course I missed a post saying these now work fine, in which case please advise). I know it might take a minute for the new fiji arch to be folding friendly, or it might just come ready to rock. Did any fellow folders happen to be one of the lucky ones that bought one before they sold out? If so please keep us updated! Im looking to upgrade some and I am looking at the 290x's, possibly another 3 of them, at least 2. If I can get some reports about the fury X and folding though I might hold out.

Thanks in advance for anyone who can test one of these out and share some info on their fah compatibility and wattage draw while folding.

[CygnusXI]

To save a little time for others pointing me to the maxwell issue, looks like there is some progress on maxwells viewtopic.php?f=24&t=27683 (is this the latest new though?) . Still very curious to know if anyone has an AMD fury x on the way..

[bruce]

Some folks have been talking about them but I don't know of anyone who has one yet. There are some 290X's around.

I guess engineering samples were pretty tightly controlled and the stock at the vendors is pretty limited compared to the demand.

[foldy]

In FahBench thread i added a link to performance of AMD Fury X and R9 390X
viewtopic.php?f=38&t=24225&start=150#p277252

[JimF]

So, I was looking to get my hands on one of these new Fury X gpus clocking in at almost 9 teraflops if I recall, they appear to have been sold out across the board. With all the reported issues of the maxwell cards Im staying far away from those (unless of course I missed a post saying these now work fine, in which case please advise).

My GTX 960 and GTX 970 have been folding only Core_18 for over a month with no problems on Win7 64-bit. The 960 gets around 150 kPPD on average, and the 970 about 250 kPPD, though it seems to vary somewhat more. On the other hand, my two HD 7870s get only Core_17, and average about 80 kPPD, so if that is like the architecture on Fury X, it could be you will get only Core_17 also for a while.

[bruce]

I don't remember which version of OpenMM is used in each of the cores. (It's certainly not the beta version 6.3). Nevertheless, they have and open bug noting a performance loss associated with Windows and potentially associated with AMD, as well. When this bug is resolved, it's likely to find something that applies retroactively to the cases that you're observing.

@JimF: I think you probably don't want to see what the Fury X would look like on the current version of Core_18 -- assuming that the bug-fix will help that.

[JimF]

@JimF: I think you probably don't want to see what the Fury X would look like on the current version of Core_18 -- assuming that the bug-fix will help that.

Looking at the Beta forum, I can imagine. I love the Maxwells, and am looking forward to Pascal, whenever that may be.

[muziqaz]

So far either drivers or fah core itself have no clue what to do with each other evilpenguin91 has one now, and it does not look good yet, or doesn't make any sense that is

[bruce]

The Fury X obviously has better video -- if you have a 4K display and you plan on gaming. That doesn't help FAH, though.

It has more compute power, which will increase the PPD, but it's not clear (to me, at least) whether the drivers need to treat the compute hardware differently or is this just another R9. Symtk has some work to do on OpenMM to make the R9 series work better, but whether that work applies to the whole series or has to be done in pieces is a big question in my mind.

[Sven]

Hi everyone,

from a long time reader, and now first time poster.

Got my Sapphire R9 Fury X yesterday. It's now folding for an hour or so. Got The Project 9201 on Core_17, at the moment I'm at about 290'000 PPD read by the HFM, other PPD's on other Project will be posted when I get one.

It's an old and freshly installed Q9550 Windows 7 machine where I installed the Fury X (Driver 15.15 Beta) in the 16x PCI-E Slot. No CPU-Folding.

If you're interested in more Information, just ask.

Greetings
Sven

[muziqaz]

bruce, fury x should in theory be very very fast in folding. at the moment devs finally pinned down the issues which were hammering AMD performance, but obviously that still leaves us with subpar performance when compared to nvidia cards. At the moment Carlos is in talks with one of the AMD guys, who is trying to kick some arse around AMD on why folding was forgotten down on their end. Hopefully with their further involvement they should be able to unlock full potential of their hardware.

[monkeyclaw]

Hey Sven (or anyone else with a Fury X that is folding), any updates on what the different PPDs are for the different WUs, and what the average and/or high end of the PPD seems to be for the card? I'm quite curious myself about just how much science the Fury X can pump out

[Sven]

Hi Monkeyclaw,

until now I only received 9201 Projects with a PPD of average 290'000. At the moment I had to pause Folding@Home because of a heatwave here in Switzerland (the Fury X hasn't a problem with that, but I do ). Next time the temperatures go down I will continue folding with hopefully different projects.

[muziqaz]

core 21(fixed) p9704 - ppd 466k
core 17 p13001 - 377k
core 17 p9201 - 361k

core 18 is still broken, but we expect that to be fixed quite soon.

Also, now we have AMD attention, we do hope this will evolve into more AMD involvement into optimisations towards fah.

[monkeyclaw]

Oh wow. So the 377k and 361k... those seem to be competitive with Nvidia's 980 Ti, right?

And oh, I didn't realize that Core18 on Nvidia was an improvement for their Maxwell cards, and that AMD can't get them to work right just yet. I thought that the Nvidia cards just had too much trouble with the core 17, and so the 18 was a compromise for them...

Maybe some people here can help quickly clarify the current state of Nvidia cards (and somewhat, AMD cards) with folding compatibility/full potential-usability... I remember that Nvidia used to REALLY destroy AMD in terms of GPU PPD vs their price and/or performance equivalent counterparts in the AMD/ATi side of things. At some point however that changed, I think when Core17/GPU QRB work units came around, and now it seems to be the Nvidia crowd are the ones worried about their cards not being used to their full potentials. Despite that, I do remember seeing some wild numbers for the Nvidia card counterparts more recently, almost making Nvidia seem like the folder's choice once again.

What exactly is going on, if anyone can succinctly explain all this core 17/18, old core 16 wus being resorted to nvida, etc. kinda stuff.

and Whoa: what is this Core 21 deal? Is it on beta right now, and open to all GCN AMD cards or what? (I have a 280x atm, gets around 150 to 160kish PPD on the best core17 WUs. Would love to see a core 21 on it!)

Sorry if this has all gotten a bit off topic. I still very interested in seeing more PPD values for the R9 Fury X from anyone that has them, and thanks Sven for chiming in again, good luck getting through the heatwave! I patiently await your return to the folding masses