Sapphire Launches A New Flagship: Nitro R9 Fury

Latest Videos FromTom's Hardware
Contributor

Kevin Carbotte is a contributing writer for Tom's Hardware who primarily covers VR and AR hardware. He has been writing for us for more than four years.

  • 2Be_or_Not2Be
    "Sapphire said the Nitro R9 Fury’s PCB includes 6-phase circuitry on an 8-layer PCB, which features 2 Oz of copper, enabling Sapphire to push 360 Amps through the GPU. "


    Well, 360 Amps in a single GPU is absolutely incredible! Perhaps a little too incredible... :)

    Maybe you meant 360 watts.
    Reply
  • Epsilon_0EVP
    From what I remember, the power delivery circuitry in the card reduces voltage to about 1V by the time it gets to the GPU. So 360A is exactly equivalent to 360W; they're just quoting the figure in amps.
    Reply
  • Moeseph de tyre
    360 amps would be correct. P=VI, 1.2 volts times 360 amps equals 432 watts. So there is the headroom for a hungry Fiji when over clocked.
    Reply
  • kcarbotte
    17307546 said:
    "Sapphire said the Nitro R9 Fury’s PCB includes 6-phase circuitry on an 8-layer PCB, which features 2 Oz of copper, enabling Sapphire to push 360 Amps through the GPU. "


    Well, 360 Amps in a single GPU is absolutely incredible! Perhaps a little too incredible... :)

    Maybe you meant 360 watts.

    it's possible that Sapphire meant watts, but the release clearly states 360 amps.
    Just because the PCB can handle that much power, doesn't mean it will ever happen in the real world. I believe this is just Sapphire over building the PCB, but you bring up a good point.

    I will reach out to Sapphire for clarification of this.
    Reply
  • 2Be_or_Not2Be
    From what I remember, the power delivery circuitry in the card reduces voltage to about 1V by the time it gets to the GPU. So 360A is exactly equivalent to 360W; they're just quoting the figure in amps.

    True, but I don't think they are reducing the voltage and greatly increasing the amperage. That would seem like a bit of unnecessary circuitry.
    Reply
  • ko888
    That card's GPU operates at 1.22 Volts when running a 3D load. The input voltage of 12 Volts needs to be dropped down to 1.22 Volts by the VRM circuit.

    Since that card can draw over 440 Watts, when running Furmark, then Ohm's Law tells us that the GPU will draw:
    440 Watts ÷ 1.22 Volts = 361 Amps.
    Reply
  • Epsilon_0EVP
    17308210 said:
    That card's GPU operates at 1.22 Volts when running a 3D load. The input voltage of 12 Volts needs to be dropped down to 1.22 Volts by the VRM circuit.

    Since that card can draw over 440 Watts, when running Furmark, then Ohm's Law tells us that the GPU will draw:
    440 Watts ÷ 1.22 Volts = 361 Amps.

    That's not Ohm's Law, but the calculations themselves are correct.
    Reply
  • ko888
    17308291 said:
    17308210 said:
    That card's GPU operates at 1.22 Volts when running a 3D load. The input voltage of 12 Volts needs to be dropped down to 1.22 Volts by the VRM circuit.

    Since that card can draw over 440 Watts, when running Furmark, then Ohm's Law tells us that the GPU will draw:
    440 Watts ÷ 1.22 Volts = 361 Amps.

    That's not Ohm's Law, but the calculations themselves are correct.

    When I took Electrical Engineering in university it sure was.
    Reply
  • toddybody
    How are non-reference Fiji clocks now? Last I saw (launch articles), they were struggling to take Fury X's over 75Mhz...which blew my mind.
    Reply
  • Epsilon_0EVP
    17308371 said:
    When I took Electrical Engineering in university it sure was.

    From the ECE/Physics courses I took, what is now known as Ohm's Law is only the equation V = IR (and any directly related equation). The formula P = VI is the electric power formula. Perhaps it was taught differently where/when you were taught.

    The diagram you provide only uses the two laws in conjunction to write any one of the four variables in terms of the two others. Note that no single expression in the diagram uses more than two variables, indicating two degrees of freedom consistent with two equations.
    Reply