Fury X released

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
uglyduckling81

uglyduckling81

Distinguished
Feb 24, 2011
719
0
19,060
http://forums.hardwarezone.com.sg/hardware-clinic-2/%5Bgpu-review%5D-sapphire-amd-r9-fury-x-rise-5087633.html
So some people have started to receive their Fury X's and have run some preliminary bench's in Shadow of Mordor. All the leaked bench's were true it turns out.
Ultra settings in 1440p getting an average of 85fps.
Ultra settings in 4k getting an average of 48 fps
Basically the same as the Titan X and 980ti.
With some time to improve the drivers we might see it surpass the Titan X. Now we know HBM only needs 4gb of to run 4k and AMD are competing in the ultra high end again.
This is good news for everyone.
 
AMD stated the Fury X will be $650, Fury will be $550, Nano yet to be announced. (USA)

Though in Australia the 980ti is $1k and AMD have stated their RRP will be $979 to undercut the 980ti a little bit.
 
That's for the Fury X supposedly. The regular Fury doesn't launch till next week to give the impatient and early adopters time to buy the highest profit margin card first.
The only place I can actually find listing it has it for $1099 though.
 


cool, thanks duckling - i'm quite intrigued to see how these cards compete and their sale price - not that i'll be getting one. it is good to see competition.

cheers
 
Yeah I won't be either. I'm currently trying to get a GTX 970 second hand from someone that want's to upgrade to a 980ti or Fury X. Lots of people around with more money than me.
I tried an 8Gb 290x but the UEFI bios wasn't compatible with my motherboard apparently so I had to send it back.
 


ah heck - well, you are more likely to get a 2nd hand 970 now definitely :) fingers crossed champ, one comes your way soon. all the best
 
I want a FuryX but no interest at all in a water cooled version. I hope Sapphire or someone else does an air cooled model. If not I will have to settle for a regular Fury.
 

No where to put the radiator in my current case setup.
 
Reviews are out. Overall quite competitive with 980Ti. But stangely the gap widen in 980ti favors going down resolution as mention in TPU conclusion. 980ti have less overhead on lower resolution? Also righr now hardocp probably having the harsh review towards Fury X.
 
from hardocp:
http://www.hardocp.com/article/2015/06/24/amd_radeon_r9_fury_x_video_card_review/11#.VYqvkvntlBc

"Usually trying to decide between two video cards at the same price point is a wash, with very even and split performance. However, this is not the case this time with the AMD Radeon R9 Fury X and GeForce GTX 980 Ti. There is a definite pattern that leads to one video card being the best value for the money, and it is GeForce GTX 980 Ti, not the AMD Radeon R9 Fury X"

seems like my early speculations got backed up.
 
So AMD have managed to match the 980ti by using hbm and 40w more power. Imagine if the 980ti had hbm and more power, it would wipe the floor with fury x.

Most sites are also reporting very poor overlooking of the fury x, around 5% despite the thermal headroom, whereas 980ti can easily be oveclocked 25%.

Add to that a rather limiting 4gb vram vs 6gb for 980ti, I'm rather unimpressed.

I'm afraid when I sell my R9-290, I'll be going green next.

(also annoyed when they rebranded 290-390, they slapped on another $150 here in Oz. )
 
Sadly my advices to help seekers won't really get affected by the release of the new amd cards.

It seems i'll still have to advice:

- gtx 970 as best price/performance card
- gtx 980 as best card for 1080p gaming
- gtx 980ti for 1440p gaming
- wait for PAscal for 4k gaming( or 980ti SLI if can't wait)
- the only point when i'm not sure is the mid range... for example gtx 960 vs 380 or 380x. it's really hard to tell which one is worth it more, since the prices are very different based on locations
 
it probably needs more volts, with nvidia the boost algorithm automatically ups the volts when clocking. While i understand the reasoning behind the decisions made by most sites to not tamper with voltages, i think in recent times it tilts the oc test in nvidias favor a lot.

also the uarch is the same used in Tonga so they just made it bigger, any efficiency gains came from the new memory type. Had they also spent some more time and monye on the uarch it would have undoubtedly been better. But they dont have the moneys to do everything, i wouldn't be surprised if they used like 90% of their R&D funds on the Zen project and HBM for the past year as everything else seems to be tweaked old stuff (apus included)...


 
Wasnt that impressed to be honest. Although its good its performance is close to the 980 ti (if not quite as good in the majority of games) and the price is cheaper, was expecting more considering the big deal kicked up about the HBM.
 
don't forget that maxwell 2.0 overclocks like a beast, while the fury x fails to maintain any stable decent OC. on a gtx 980 like the asus rog hybrid cooled posseidon you can easily game on 1600Mhz stable with any games, and it will crush the Fury X to dust. And that's only a GTX 980.

You can guess what a custom open loop cooled 980ti will do to the fury X in benchmarks and in game tests. And there is the vram limit with 4gb if it comes to compete with the 980ti or titan x.

AMd should have set the price lower if it wanted to be competitive. around 550$, but maximum 600$ for the Fury x
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom