mkreku Posted June 25, 2015 Share Posted June 25, 2015 (edited) So.. the first reviews of the new Radeon Fury X are starting to come in. Like this one from Tom's Hardware: http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-r9-fury-x,4196.html Conclusion: Same price as the GTX980Ti, same performance as GTX980Ti. Better energy consumption (!), lower noise, cooler form factor. I like. But I will not buy. Edit: AAAHH! SOMEONE FIX MY TITLE TYPO! I'M SO ASHAMED! Edited June 25, 2015 by mkreku Swedes, go to: Spel2, for the latest game reviews in swedish! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keyrock Posted June 25, 2015 Share Posted June 25, 2015 It looks like a good card. It's not the hammer blow to Nvidia that AMD fans had been hoping for, but it's not a bad deal either. It basically goes blow for blow with a 980Ti at the same price, so if you're looking for a card at that price range, it basically comes down to brand preference (or form factor if you happen to have a really small case). RFK Jr 2024 "Any organization created out of fear must create fear to survive." - Bill Hicks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gfted1 Posted June 25, 2015 Share Posted June 25, 2015 Edit: AAAHH! SOMEONE FIX MY TITLE TYPO! I'M SO ASHAMED! I would but my noodly appendages do not reach into Skeeters Junkyard. Only the Global mods, LadyCrimson and syn2083 can help you out so you may want to send one a PM. 1 "I'm your biggest fan, Ill follow you until you love me, Papa" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Humanoid Posted June 25, 2015 Share Posted June 25, 2015 It shows how much we've been spoiled in the past by AMD advancing the value proposition that we're disappointed that they've merely caught up to nVidia this round. the 980Ti, as of this second, is probably the better product, but the wildcard is whether Fury gains enough over the coming months to overtake it. It's not an improbable expectation: as a more experimental, less mature product, there's more scope for it to gain performance from driver updates, and the other factor is that at the moment it's voltage locked, we have no idea how much overclocking headroom it has once voltages can be tweaked. To be fair it's a legitimate gripe in that the product effectively does nothing new for now in terms of the consumer market, whereas previous releases, though perhaps technically less impressive, have really made waves by forcing a downward adjustment in all prices. The Fury will do no such thing as AMD seems content to merely price there products along the same price:performance curve established by nVidia. (This is also seen in the surprisingly high prices for the 390 series cards). The economic reality is probably that AMD can no longer afford to undercut to the degree they did back in the 4xxx and 5xxx series days, especially as the Fury is a large chip that is likely more expensive to fabricate than anything they've released previously. L I E S T R O N GL I V E W R O N G Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gorgon Posted June 25, 2015 Share Posted June 25, 2015 When are the 14 mn chips from Nvidia showing up. That's a pretty big deal, long time since we had a die shift in GFX. Na na na na na na ... greg358 from Darksouls 3 PVP is a CHEATER. That is all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keyrock Posted June 25, 2015 Share Posted June 25, 2015 When are the 14 mn chips from Nvidia showing up. That's a pretty big deal, long time since we had a die shift in GFX. Likely with Pascal in 2016. Pascal will also be the first line of Nvidia cards with 3D memory. RFK Jr 2024 "Any organization created out of fear must create fear to survive." - Bill Hicks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mkreku Posted June 25, 2015 Author Share Posted June 25, 2015 Not quite as positive as Tom's Hardware, Eurogamer's review of the Fury X: http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2015-radeon-r9-fury-x-review Conclusion: Not as fast as GTX980Ti or Titan X, but may depend on drivers. Swedes, go to: Spel2, for the latest game reviews in swedish! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mkreku Posted June 25, 2015 Author Share Posted June 25, 2015 Edit: AAAHH! SOMEONE FIX MY TITLE TYPO! I'M SO ASHAMED! I would but my noodly appendages do not reach into Skeeters Junkyard. Only the Global mods, LadyCrimson and syn2083 can help you out so you may want to send one a PM. Yngwie would be turning in his grave, if he was dead. Oh well. Swedes, go to: Spel2, for the latest game reviews in swedish! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gfted1 Posted June 25, 2015 Share Posted June 25, 2015 Yngwie Malmsteen? Saw him open for Iron Maiden ~1987. Good times. "I'm your biggest fan, Ill follow you until you love me, Papa" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pidesco Posted June 25, 2015 Share Posted June 25, 2015 Title fixed. For posterity! 2 "My hovercraft is full of eels!" - Hungarian touristI am Dan Quayle of the Romans.I want to tattoo a map of the Netherlands on my nether lands.Heja Sverige!!Everyone should cuffawkle more.The wrench is your friend. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mkreku Posted June 25, 2015 Author Share Posted June 25, 2015 Yngwie Malmsteen? Saw him open for Iron Maiden ~1987. Good times. http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/yngwie-malmsteen-unleashes-the-****ing-fury Link probably won't work because of the kindergarten rules of this board, but you get the gist of it. 1 Swedes, go to: Spel2, for the latest game reviews in swedish! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keyrock Posted June 25, 2015 Share Posted June 25, 2015 Title fixed. For posterity! Well played. RFK Jr 2024 "Any organization created out of fear must create fear to survive." - Bill Hicks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bokishi Posted June 26, 2015 Share Posted June 26, 2015 I thought Fury X would be faster Current 3DMark Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
samm Posted June 26, 2015 Share Posted June 26, 2015 No Titan-trouncing this time around However, it's nice that AMD has caught up with nVidia's high end again. Still more power hungry (as if that would really matter in these spheres of performance and cost... THG measured in a too limited scenario), but refreshingly innovative and top class hardware apparently, really nice materials Still kind of tempted to get one for the love of the tech behind it. None the less, I'll wait for DX12 / Vulkan performance and for prices to drop, and, I think, I'd go for the Nano instead 1 Citizen of a country with a racist, hypocritical majority Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mkreku Posted July 1, 2015 Author Share Posted July 1, 2015 Review on Guru3D: http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/amd_radeon_r9_fury_x_review,1.html Conclusion: Slower than GTX980Ti at lower resolutions, Titan X-like performance at Ultra-HD. Also, AMD seems to have completely eliminated the frame pacing problem with the Fury X. Yeah, I was hoping for more. I'll skip this generation. Swedes, go to: Spel2, for the latest game reviews in swedish! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mkreku Posted July 3, 2015 Author Share Posted July 3, 2015 I just saw the prices for the Fury X here in Sweden: $900+. **** that. For reference, the GTX980Ti (a card that's better in almost every aspect) goes for around $950. Actually, **** that too. Swedes, go to: Spel2, for the latest game reviews in swedish! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Humanoid Posted July 4, 2015 Share Posted July 4, 2015 (edited) Some breaking controversy right now - nVidia driver default settings appear to be overriding in-game quality settings to improve performance at the cost of image quality. When the setting is changed from default to max quality, the performance drop is about 10%. Titan X's lead over the Fury X (which respects the in-game settings and is rendering at maximum quality) at sub-4k resolutions? About 10%. The reviewer at HardOCP has confirmed that they test with all control panel settings at default, so it's definitely a factor that's affected at least some reviews - will be interesting to see as reviewers now don't typically post this kind of information in the actual reviews. Stolen side-by-side comparison from Anandtech forums: Fury X vs Titan XTitan X High Quality vs Default settings Edited July 4, 2015 by Humanoid L I E S T R O N GL I V E W R O N G Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bartimaeus Posted July 4, 2015 Share Posted July 4, 2015 Looks basically like the difference between no anisotropic filtering and max anisotropic filtering... Quote How I have existed fills me with horror. For I have failed in everything - spelling, arithmetic, riding, tennis, golf; dancing, singing, acting; wife, mistress, whore, friend. Even cooking. And I do not excuse myself with the usual escape of 'not trying'. I tried with all my heart. In my dreams, I am not crippled. In my dreams, I dance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Humanoid Posted July 4, 2015 Share Posted July 4, 2015 Seems to be the obvious thing, yes. But I don't think that alone accounts for a 10% hit necessarily, so some other sneaky but less obvious 'optimisations' may be happening alongside. L I E S T R O N GL I V E W R O N G Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mkreku Posted July 4, 2015 Author Share Posted July 4, 2015 It actually might be up to a 10% hit on performance, seeing as AF is bandwidth intensive and it just gets worse at these extreme resolutions. Fury X excels in bandwidth so maybe Nvidia was trying to win some back in an area where they know AMD is better? Just speculating. Swedes, go to: Spel2, for the latest game reviews in swedish! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
samm Posted July 4, 2015 Share Posted July 4, 2015 (edited) Titan X High Quality vs Default settings Seems that Titan X "Default" is not only lack of AF, but introduces an LOD bias. Interesting [edit1]Interesting because while proper AF does cost some performance, a LOD bias causes rendering less complex objects which has additional advantages (not for the user of course, but for overall performance and utilization, increasing apparent efficiency). [edit2]Further Titan X screenshots driver quality settings on default do not exhibit such a behaviour. Maybe something in the settings used for that comparison is screwed up. Edited July 4, 2015 by samm Citizen of a country with a racist, hypocritical majority Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now