R9 Fury Under Volting makes it better?

[Michael_13]

I'm confused but intrigued. OC: 1100 GPU Clock + 50% Power

Firestrike
13195 = -6mV
13251 = -12mV
13317 = -18mV

All were highs for this card.
http://www.gigabyte.com/products/product-page.aspx?pid=5680#kf

http://imgur.com/appxytp

 

[13thmonkey]

you are only undervolting, not underclocking. So you are taking it closer to instability. However, whilst it is stable it would be stable at a lower temp, which means that it'll be downclocking less, hence a higher score.

 

[drkatz42]

interesting! Obviously the difference is quite negligible. The underclocking reduces heat and in turn reduces throttling?

 

[Michael_13]

you are only undervolting, not underclocking. So you are taking it closer to instability. However, whilst it is stable it would be stable at a lower temp, which means that it'll be downclocking less, hence a higher score.

Hmm what would be causing the throttling card doesn't go over 71c as it is and I hear more people talk about 75-80c

 

[jlfx64]

I did some testing using Heaven, as I am too cheap to buy benchmarking software! I couldn't keep my card stable at 1100 at anything less than 0. The most I could get it up to was 1110, but that was at +72. Here is what I found:
Heaven Score/Core Clock/Voltage (Using MSI Afterburn) (Heaven was at all max settings 1440p, with Qnix monitored oc'ed to 96hz)

1081/1100/0
1079/1100/0
1073/1100/0
1068/1090/-6
1068/1075/-18
1067/1075/-12
1064/1110/+48
1064/1075/-6
1050/1110/+72

Very interesting, not sure what to make of it. It looks like my sweet spot is around 1100/0. I could probably adjust those numbers slight (down) to get similar results, which I may have to do. Heaven shut down on one test at those settings, but obviously, I got 3 good readings. What obviously sticks out is the max core overclock with the highest voltage overclock having the worst results!

 

[jlfx64]

Couple of other observations when comparing to my 390:
-GPU temps are much lower. Through all those tests, I was just below 70c the entire time with the automatic fan control. I could get them that low with the 390, but not with the fan on auto.
-CPU usage (and thus temp) is way lower. I would say its averaging somewhere in the mid 30% range through the tests. It was almost double that with the 390.
-Vram usage is a little higher. Not a lot, but noticeable. I'm using almost 2gb for these tests and the 390 (if I recall correctly) was using just over 1gb.

 

[Michael_13]

The only software it works stable on is Sapphire Trixx and the Firestrike bench is free if you download the 3d Mark Demo on Steam.

 

[jlfx64]

I uploaded the demo and ran a couple of Firestrike benchmarks. Both came in at just under 12k for me. That was at 1100/0. I will try to tinker some more this week. That seems to be a good bit lower than your results.

 

[Michael_13]

I uploaded the demo and ran a couple of Firestrike benchmarks. Both came in at just under 12k for me. That was at 1100/0. I will try to tinker some more this week. That seems to be a good bit lower than your results.

Other things to note that may make a difference.
I7 6700K OC'd 4.8Ghz
32GB DDR4 3200 Memory
1 TB SSD Drive

Let me know if any of these things are the difference. Oh and I noticed the image wasn't loading in the OP so I added a link.

 

[jlfx64]

I'm running:
i5-4690k 4.5ghz
8gb of DDR3 1600 RAM
500gb SSD (Samsung)

What monitor are you using?

 

[Michael_13]

I'm running:
i5-4690k 4.5ghz
8gb of DDR3 1600 RAM
500gb SSD (Samsung)

What monitor are you using?

Dual LG Electronics UM67 29UM67 in FreeSync

 

[jlfx64]

I have to say, I am pretty unimpressed with the Fury so far. I'm crashing a lot, so much so, that I have gone back to the stock clocks and voltage. I can't even get Hitman to work at all. Battlefront is stunning, but shuts down pretty regularly with the AMD recommended setting. I uninstalled and reinstalled my drivers last night, so I am going to try to do some more testing this week, but overall, I was getting better test scores (Heaven at 1440p, Catzilla at SD) with the 390 and way less crashing. How has your experience been?

 

[Michael_13]

I have to say, I am pretty unimpressed with the Fury so far. I'm crashing a lot, so much so, that I have gone back to the stock clocks and voltage. I can't even get Hitman to work at all. Battlefront is stunning, but shuts down pretty regularly with the AMD recommended setting. I uninstalled and reinstalled my drivers last night, so I am going to try to do some more testing this week, but overall, I was getting better test scores (Heaven at 1440p, Catzilla at SD) with the 390 and way less crashing. How has your experience been?

After I stopped playing with the clocks and a fresh driver install I'm currently at 131xx and no issues. It's strange you're having so many issues. If you're using sapphire Trixx up the voltage by +6 from default as I found 1100/500/+ 50 Power and +6 voltage is stable but I agree. AMD itself has been disappointing and hard to work with compared to Nvidia.

 

[Michael_13]

I have to say, I am pretty unimpressed with the Fury so far. I'm crashing a lot, so much so, that I have gone back to the stock clocks and voltage. I can't even get Hitman to work at all. Battlefront is stunning, but shuts down pretty regularly with the AMD recommended setting. I uninstalled and reinstalled my drivers last night, so I am going to try to do some more testing this week, but overall, I was getting better test scores (Heaven at 1440p, Catzilla at SD) with the 390 and way less crashing. How has your experience been?

part of me was considering getting 980's but 1080's is only months away.

 

[jlfx64]

I'm using Afterburn and I am getting to similar settings, just lots of crashing and ho-hum performance. I liked the MSI 390, but the Fury has been a real disappointment so far. I may just bite the bullet and jump to a 980ti from here. I will give it some time and try to tinker. I want the Fury to work, but man, I need to have a breakthrough or something for me to keep it long term.

 

[Michael_13]

I'm using Afterburn and I am getting to similar settings, just lots of crashing and ho-hum performance. I liked the MSI 390, but the Fury has been a real disappointment so far. I may just bite the bullet and jump to a 980ti from here. I will give it some time and try to tinker. I want the Fury to work, but man, I need to have a breakthrough or something for me to keep it long term.

Yeah you have to use sapphire trixx only stable app

 

[jlfx64]

I will give that a shot.

 

[Michael_13]

I will give that a shot.

That alone is kind of a downfall for the Fury, that only one app works with it well.

 

[garneroutlaw]

It's no secret the Fury was a messed up card, at least some models. I had a Fury for awhile, and I feel lucky to have sold it for $400. I had all the aforementioned problems and some. Talked to a few people online and we came to the conclusion that some of the custom PCBs were faulty and/or extremely poor quality control. If you are getting the crashing, I suggest selling NOW before your card loses value with the launch of Pascal/Polaris. You should be able to get at least $380 for it. Take the hit and put it towards a 1080!

 

[jlfx64]

This Trixx sucks. It keep resetting my core clock to 1050 after I apply settings. All the other settings are taking, just not core clock. It also crashed a couple of times and I had to keep reloading it. Getting fed up pretty fast.

 

[Michael_13]

This Trixx sucks. It keep resetting my core clock to 1050 after I apply settings. All the other settings are taking, just not core clock. It also crashed a couple of times and I had to keep reloading it. Getting fed up pretty fast.

I'm leaning towards swapping for for a GTX 980, It'll probably maintain some sale value if I want to swap over in a few months too. AMD drivers have really disappointed alot my 390X devil was nice before I swapped for the Fury