AMD Radeon R9 Fury Review: Sapphire Tri-X Overclocked

Page 5 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Status
Not open for further replies.

Blueberries

Reputable
Dec 3, 2014
572
0
5,060
30


USB C / Thunderbolt 3.0 certainly allots for it.

It's just a matter of performance, and some day that performance will be trumped, and so on. Eventually these companies are going to realize that after a while consumers won't have anything worth dumping their money into.

Also, I'm sure a few Tesla K80's could do it, why couldn't they?
 

obababoy

Honorable
Jul 24, 2013
55
0
10,640
2

The whole point of Fury X was to be a small card...YES. Fury is a different story. ANY gamer with a mid-tower can run these large GPU's fine! If you want a small form factor, wait for R9 nano or get the Fury-X. These stay pretty cool on air unless put under un-natural stress tests which never happen in real world. The VRM temps are a bit worrisome and surprising considering my Sapphire Vapor-X R9 290 has vrm temps around 60c...Louder? PCper.com noted these are noticeably quieter than the NVidia cards on air. Not sure where you feel that is true...



Haha wrong! I go into a game and adjust settings all the time even with a top end card. For instance on AMD's side there are some good(credit to NV) and terrible(also credit to NV) settings in games which are either poorly optimized for AMD or inflate tessellation for no reason which AMD doesn't do well. Either way, I turn off some of those settings even if I have the best card because they rarely actually improve fidelity to an extent that warrants the performance loss.

To your credit, the deviation in setups was a bit frustrating this time with Tom's setup. I agree with you there. TBH drivers are premature but there isn't going to be a huge increase with this line of AMD products. 390x is overpriced for the performance. 8gb vram is useless unless you CF it, in which case I would much rather save money and get the 290 8GB versions. Fury is a great buy if you want to stay AMD and are at least on something slower than R9 290. Fury X is a sweet card for people who want a SFF or great temperatures that wont bake their office and don't mind paying an inflated premium for it. 980 and 980ti are priced pretty damn well, perform great, but if you are like myself, id rather lose 10% performance than be with NV and my awesome ASUS MG279Q means AMD for life! ;)

With all that said, I decided to get a freesync monitor after the Fury X and Fury reviews because the cost for them isn't worth it and I would rather hang on to my R9 290 OC @ 1175mhz @75C and wait for there next variant sometime next year. The bump to 1440p hurt the performance but freesync makes it all buttery smooth within the range (which most titles easily do on my card).
 

Reaver192

Distinguished
Oct 2, 2011
61
0
18,630
0
Hey, TOMS<<<<<<<<<<<<<<FIX THE ARROWS ALREADY PLEASE??????? IS IT THAT HARD?????????????? GET A COLLEGE KID WHO IS POOR TO DO IT FOR YOU, IT'S NOT VERY HARD..............
 

Blueberries

Reputable
Dec 3, 2014
572
0
5,060
30


My point was that overclocking leads to higher temperatures (as well as noise) and it clearly isn't worth it on these cards. I was confused as to the Fury / Fury X nomenclature, but overall my point remains the same, these cards aren't worth overclocking past factory overclocks. The benefit, if any, isn't worth the cost.

 


Will AMD put a HDMI 1.4a port on them?
 

jimmysmitty

Champion
Moderator


Greenland will more than likely have HDMI 2.0 since it is to be released in 2016.
 

Blueberries

Reputable
Dec 3, 2014
572
0
5,060
30


LOL. We will see
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS