3DMark Firemark Scores Radeon Fury X surfaces - but are they real ?
Click here to post a comment for 3DMark Firemark Scores Radeon Fury X surfaces - but are they real ? on our message forum
GALTARAUJO
Xenotone
Let's just hope Fury can get a bit of competition on the go again.
moab600
Fender178
I hope that they are real because it is pretty impressive that a rebranded r9 290 (390) is beating out a 970 plus 2 fury Xs are faster than 2 Titian X's and just 1 of those cards are faster than the 980 ti and on par with the 1 Titan X which is very impressive.
Evildead666
Evildead666
One other thing thats just crossed my mind, is that the Fiji PCB should be very simple, and much cheaper to produce, than all the other current cards out there.
No memory traces to put in at all, just display outputs and power stages.
Shouldn't that give a margin for pricing ?
rm082e
http://i.imgur.com/bNqJYgA.png[/spoiler]
Really? Then what explains this?
[spoiler]rm082e
Fender178
eclap
Fox2232
rm082e
Here is the link I was shooting for.
I just don't see how someone can say AMD has been competitive against the 970 when their market share has fallen off a cliff to record lows since it came out.
Fixed. rm082e
eclap
Evildead666
Evildead666
Fox2232
rm082e
17seconds
Even if these benchmarks are real, Firestrike has always given a relative advantage to AMD cards. In Guru3d's benchmarks, the 290X takes a healthy lead over the GTX 970 in Firestrike. Of course, there are other elements to GPU purchase decisions besides FPS and 3D Mark scores.
http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/gigabyte_geforce_gtx_980_ti_g1_gaming_soc_review,24.html
eclap