Results 1 to 13 of 13
  1. #1
    Elite Sage

    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Bristol
    PSN ID
    Lymphatik
    Age
    25
    Posts
    11,834
    Rep Power
    102

    AMD Radeon R9 Fury X tested: not quite a 980 Ti killer

    It's a bit too long so I'll just cut out the graphs and a conclusion from PCGamer
















    Overclocking, liquid cooling and conclusion

    The Fury X’s framerates are tantalizingly close to the 980 Ti SC's, and it’s hard to know exactly what’s holding it back: the hardware of the card itself, or AMD’s drivers. Given the 980 Ti SC's factory overclock, that puts the stock 980 Ti at about equal performance, but with its RAM advantage. But Nvidia's recent drivers have given the 980 Ti some nice performance bumps; AMD’s been slow to release optimized drivers for years, and it’s quite possible that the Fury X is launching with poorly optimized drivers. An update could, potentially, pull the Fury X dead even with its competition, and nudge games like Tomb Raider and Hitman Absolution into the win column for AMD.
    But that’s speculation. For now, Nvidia’s more frequent driver updates and better software experience make their cards more compelling.
    The Fury X’s one other hope is its liquid cooling potential. The card’s amazing 7.5-inch length is possible thanks to the new HBM memory a beefy external radiator, which may make it difficult to install in some cases—that’s the drawback of its fantastic cooling potential, which idles at about 28C. While the Fury X draws less than 300W at a standard load, AMD claims it has headroom for up to 375W. If you're building a rig that won't have space for the liquid cooled radiator, the air-cooled Fury will be the same size, minus the radiator, and there's an even smaller (lower-TDP) Nano card coming later this year.
    We haven’t had the opportunity to explore overclocking performance yet, but even there the air-cooled 980 Ti will put up some strong competition. The 980 Ti can increase performance by a good 20 percent overclocked, so the Fury X’s overclocking will have to be truly extraordinary to surpass it.
    Until we’ve explored the overclocking potential of the Fury X, our recommendation is to wait on a purchase. Drivers could improve performance, and the air-cooled R9 Fury will also be available at a lower price point. That may make its 4GB of memory more palatable. But from what we’ve seen, the Fury X doesn’t significantly outperform the 980 Ti, and Nvidia’s card offers 2GB more VRAM and better drivers for the same price.
    PC Gamer



    Who knows, with a few updates it could be something special. I think it was kind of telling that AMD weren't singing from the rooftops when they announced it a few weeks ago as the signle fastest card though.
    PC: i7-3930K | Asus Rampage IV Extreme | 16GB Corsair Dominator Platinum DDR3
    EVGA GTX 980Ti SC+ | Corsair AX1200i | RoG Swift | Corsair Obsidian 800D

    Watercooling: EK-Bay Spin Reservoir | EKWB Supremacy | EKWB Titan X Acetal+Nickel
    360mm + 120mm Radiators | Liang D5 pump | Primochill tubing | Barrow Fittings


    500GB Black PS4

  2. #2
    Sonata Dusk
    Nerevar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Equestria
    Age
    22
    Posts
    16,735
    Rep Power
    145
    So it costs as much as a 980 Ti yet performs worse, and it's a newer card. That's very disappointing. If this was priced at 550$ instead of 650$ it would be an excellent competitor. But no, it's not, and it's not going to pull a lot of people from team green because AMD didn't bite the bullet on it. So what was the point?

    The 390x still seems like a good card for the price though. So all hope is not lost.

  3. #3
    From the Ashes Thee Administrates

    Brandon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    PSN ID
    BrandonJBX
    Posts
    13,373
    Rep Power
    790
    Yeah, that's very disappointing. I've had VERY good experiences with the Ti series and driver support. You'll get an update that says something like "x game now has 40% better performance", which is ridiculous.

    Hopefully it's a driver thing and they can optimize it. But I think I'm gonna stick with 980 Ti for my next build if the performance of this card doesn't get better with ... something.


    "Love the life you live, and live the life you love." ~ Bob Marley

  4. #4
    Sonata Dusk
    Nerevar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Equestria
    Age
    22
    Posts
    16,735
    Rep Power
    145
    Actually, after looking at benchmarks more closely I have to say the 300 series just isn't worth it. The 390X is about 10-15% faster than the 290X but it's 130$ more. Right now I'm deciding between the GTX 970 or the 290X.

  5. #5
    Administrator
    Fijiandoce's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Pacific Isles of Doceness
    PSN ID
    Fijiandoce
    Posts
    5,311
    Rep Power
    100
    Like the 300 series, performance is disappointing. Great tech, probably poor driver support. That spec sheet favours AMD immensely, yet they fail to match.... They need to get on top of their drivers.

    Still, it's a better product then what they've been releasing thus far. Hopefully their next series finds its feet better since next round will be Nvidia's turn to dip into HBM.
    Sig courtesy of the_jim


  6. #6
    From the Ashes Thee Administrates

    Brandon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    PSN ID
    BrandonJBX
    Posts
    13,373
    Rep Power
    790
    NVIDIA's Pascal cards next year are going to be beastly.


    "Love the life you live, and live the life you love." ~ Bob Marley

  7. #7
    Administrator
    Fijiandoce's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Pacific Isles of Doceness
    PSN ID
    Fijiandoce
    Posts
    5,311
    Rep Power
    100
    Quote Originally Posted by Brandon View Post
    NVIDIA's Pascal cards next year are going to be beastly.
    Indeed. As i recall, Pascal won't need the same sort of interposer AMD use for communication between GPU core and the memory modules. This means the Pascal core wont be limited to 4GB like the Fury.

    It's a shame AMD can't capitalise more on the tech advantage they have tbh. Their drivers are such that if they said they were to write from scrath new AMD drivers, they'd probably garner more hype than an actual new card launch
    Sig courtesy of the_jim


  8. #8
    Elite Sage

    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Bristol
    PSN ID
    Lymphatik
    Age
    25
    Posts
    11,834
    Rep Power
    102
    Yeah it's a bit disappointing but I can't say I'm massively surprised. They should've tried to undercut the 980Ti and it might've made people consider it.

    The card does look nice, physically.
    PC: i7-3930K | Asus Rampage IV Extreme | 16GB Corsair Dominator Platinum DDR3
    EVGA GTX 980Ti SC+ | Corsair AX1200i | RoG Swift | Corsair Obsidian 800D

    Watercooling: EK-Bay Spin Reservoir | EKWB Supremacy | EKWB Titan X Acetal+Nickel
    360mm + 120mm Radiators | Liang D5 pump | Primochill tubing | Barrow Fittings


    500GB Black PS4

  9. #9
    Sonata Dusk
    Nerevar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Equestria
    Age
    22
    Posts
    16,735
    Rep Power
    145
    To be fair in the benchmarks it seems to hold up to the 980 Ti when at 1440 or 4k resolutions. I've had my eye on a 27" 4k monitor recently so it might play out well for people like me.

    Anyone have any experience with 4k monitors of that size?

  10. #10
    Elite Sage

    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Bristol
    PSN ID
    Lymphatik
    Age
    25
    Posts
    11,834
    Rep Power
    102
    Varsh has a monitor to that size and resolution
    PC: i7-3930K | Asus Rampage IV Extreme | 16GB Corsair Dominator Platinum DDR3
    EVGA GTX 980Ti SC+ | Corsair AX1200i | RoG Swift | Corsair Obsidian 800D

    Watercooling: EK-Bay Spin Reservoir | EKWB Supremacy | EKWB Titan X Acetal+Nickel
    360mm + 120mm Radiators | Liang D5 pump | Primochill tubing | Barrow Fittings


    500GB Black PS4

  11. #11
    From the Ashes Thee Administrates

    Brandon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    PSN ID
    BrandonJBX
    Posts
    13,373
    Rep Power
    790
    Quote Originally Posted by Nerevar View Post
    Anyone have any experience with 4k monitors of that size?
    Yes and they're gorgeous.


    "Love the life you live, and live the life you love." ~ Bob Marley

  12. #12
    Administrator
    Fijiandoce's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Pacific Isles of Doceness
    PSN ID
    Fijiandoce
    Posts
    5,311
    Rep Power
    100
    Quote Originally Posted by Nerevar View Post
    To be fair in the benchmarks it seems to hold up to the 980 Ti when at 1440 or 4k resolutions. I've had my eye on a 27" 4k monitor recently so it might play out well for people like me.

    Anyone have any experience with 4k monitors of that size?
    The fury should also hold up better when they run higher resolutions with higher AA levels....I think the review in the OP was capping out at 4xMSAA.....should have tried an 8xMSAA test to see if there was something.....But then, all that pixel data has all that room to move to and from ram, but they are kinda hung up a bit with that 4GB frame buffer. Would be a good test for the fury, to see how future proof it is, in the very least.
    Sig courtesy of the_jim


  13. #13
    Master Guru
    Bigdoggy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Age
    35
    Posts
    7,155
    Rep Power
    79
    Items Baby ChocoboPlayStationUser name style
    Quote Originally Posted by Nerevar View Post
    Actually, after looking at benchmarks more closely I have to say the 300 series just isn't worth it. The 390X is about 10-15% faster than the 290X but it's 130$ more. Right now I'm deciding between the GTX 970 or the 290X.
    I am currently in the works of building my PC, but I am not going to spend an arm and a leg just to get a high end PC (I've had one, I know what they're about, so....) so I may be going all AMD and I know it sounds wicked, but hmmmm I'm so "wishy washy" on it as I still go back and do a build with Intel, but I have no clue on what a good CPU is, however, I will get a 290x.

    I think my biggest issue right now is the case, I also don't know much about the FX 8350. The computer I built my mother I used an FX 8320 with a R9 270x and a HAF case. But for a FX 8350, R9 290x, honestly what case and chances are with that heat buildup I may have to do some cooling and I don't mean fans. I'm going to need some help. at the same time I've been looking at some i5's....

    -i5 4690

    -i7 4790

    -AMD FX-8350

    GPU

    -R9 290X sapphier

    -R9 280X sapphier

    there is the other side of me that wants to go Nvidia, but that can get quite expensive and I've already used Nvidia on this rig so I may try something different, which is why I may go AMD
    still on the fence.

    Case unkown.

    Also, if I go full AMD am I going to have to get a 850w PSU? maybe more, they are sure power hungry.

    As for the GPU if I go R9 290X sapphire some models I believe are 8GB and some are 4GB. ugh sometimes I would assume the 4GB may be better, but I don't know why I would think that, hell I dunno. Also would a Enermax fulmo ST work for the case?
    Last edited by Bigdoggy; 4 Weeks Ago at 00:57.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
vBCredits II Deluxe v2.1.0 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2010-2015 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.