Radeon Fury X Beats GeForce GTX Titan X and Fury to GTX 980 Ti: 3DMark
Click here to post a comment for Radeon Fury X Beats GeForce GTX Titan X and Fury to GTX 980 Ti: 3DMark on our message forum
kinggavin
AMD cards are powerful but gpus are made for gaming and thats where amd problem is because nvidia has most of the games (ie) the physx and the gameworks if u want the fancy extras in your game u need nvidia card also nvidia have the better game driver support over amd , i think its main reason nvidia are on top and biggest problem for amd sales more games are optimized for nvidia got gameworks and better drivers
Cartman372
It's funny, AMD always gets **** on when the discussion of drivers come up. I ran my HD4850 for 6ish years and not once during that time frame did I have a driver related game issue. In fact the only problem I had with that card was the inadequate single slot cooler. Had to put on an Arctic Cooling unit at some point.
Atombender
Very interesting. Even at UHD the Fury X (with "only" 4GB HBM) is still sligthly faster than the Titan X with it's whopping 12 GB memory. 🙂
Robbo9999
So the Fury X is on the next node of 16nm and Titan X/980ti is still 28nm, yet Fury X only narrowly beats the Titan X!? This means that once NVidia go to 16nm with Pascal then AMD will be obliterated! If the FuryX was on 28nm this would be a good achievement right, but the fact it's on 16nm, should be way better performance if they're gonna compete against NVidia. (Think I've got it right that FuryX is on 16nm - correct me if you know I'm wrong).
Blackops_2
Yup, my 4890 and 7970 never had any issues. Meanwhile i have two rigs with 780 Classies that are crashing at least twice a week now. But Nvidia sure does put out flawless drivers...:3eyes: Both are stock, never been OCed. My point is it goes both ways.
Anyhow i hope the leaks are true and Fury is faster than Titan X so competition will ensue..
kinggavin
when i had AMD card i was always getting problems with the drivers , one was when you install it used popup internet explorer and or cmd prompt and sometimes crash , on crossfire get an errors no crossfire bridge and i had youtube crashes when trying watch videos bug with flashplayer , and the catalyst conveter wouldnt install sometimes, nvidia ive never had any blue screen or problems and the nvidia control panel so much better and also nvidia have the drivers ready for every game with sli
Blackops_2
Fiji is 28nm..not 16nm
serbicu
Yeah, better performance and at almost half the price of a titan x.
And don't come with the TDP arguments.Real gamers don't care about that.
designgears
This has been pretty much proven to be fake over at /r/pcmasterrace
6311
DO THIS HAVE HDMI 2.0A ?
do this have 18gbps Bandwidth ?
Is support 12BIT 4K color ?
chismo
I'm here to correct you. You are wrong. 🙂 Still on 28nm. It's supposedly on GloFo SHP 28nm process vs TSCM 28nm but still 28nm.
Who cares would be my answer. I saw you ask (3 times) and have answered this exact question at PCPER. So you're not really here to be informed just to whine right? Spare us.
kinggavin
i wish we got american prices here in uk , this fury x and 980 ti are $650 dollars in uk pounds thats £420 so why are the same cards here £600 thats like $900 we have pay for same card
CPC_RedDawn
Nope AMD is still using 28nm for the FURY X and all up coming 300 series GPU's. Why do you think AMD needs a water cooled FURY X?? Cause the chip is freaking HUGE and packs 4096 shader cores, 256 TMU's, and around 128 ROPS and is built on an interposer where the new HBM memory is stacked around the edges close to the GPU core. Which means heat only really comes from one place on the board also allowing them to make a much smaller GPU overall as they don't need extra VRM's and circuitry for GDDR5 memory chips.
16nm is nowhere near getting the right yields yet for either AMD or Nvidia.
AMD are rumored to be partnering with Samsung who has a working 16nm fab factory already up and running and it would just a matter of spinning their chips and getting constraints sorted then out to market.
Nvidia on the other hand will be using TSMC or Global Foundry who both at the moment has issues with 16nm. So Pascal might have more issues then we think.
SetsunaFZero
u have no idea man, every game that is powered by nv is crippling amd performance, especially games that are developed with game works.
nv is also crippling Kepler performance with new drivers to promote sells of Maxwel gpu
Chillin
Does this matter to 99.9% of the buyers of this card?
Of all the things AMD could leave off the feature list, everything you listed wouldn't be missed by almost anyone.
CPC_RedDawn
Blame import charges.
I brought a $30 side panel from america for my old 800D case that has pre cut holes in it to fit 2 120mm or 140mm fans as side mounts.
Basically this is just a piece of Plexiglas with some holes in it.
It cost $30 .incl shipping when it got here I was sent a letter stating I had to pay £50 import charge!!!
CPC_RedDawn
Doesn't matter, gameworks is a joke anyway. It cripples performance in literally every game no matter if you have AMD or Nvidia.
Witcher 3 for example, with hairworks on it drops fps by around 15-20fps!!! That is huge and it doesn't even look that good.
AMD TressFX in Tomb Raider looked outstanding and it barely hit fps on my old HD7970 and when I got a GTX970 it also barely touched the fps, in SLI 970's now that I have it maybe knocks off 1fps. Very optimized.
Most of Nvidia's stuff from PhysX, HBAO+, Hairworks, etc all do nothing but drop fps for a very small increase in IQ.
I may have SLI 970's but even I leave most of that stuff disabled in games.
kinggavin
witcher 3 runs good now i have if fully maxed out with hairworks 1080p 75hz with 970 sli, ive got vsync on locked at 75 fps and it stays there constant 75fps with hairworks on now on patch 1.0.6, and i want the gamework effects on thats why i got 970 sli, a single 970 cant handle hairworks
Turanis
Cant wait to see this puppy, Fury X, in real gaming benchmarks.
Cant see how hardcore OCs will bleed this card. Will be overclockers dream. 🙂
And I remember all guys who said: omg Gtx980-TI Gtx980-TI & omg Titan X Titan X...
Now what?
Fury X will squash any GDDR5 card and will prevail.Any aircooled card with GDDR5 will be obsolete in autumn.
Even with 4GB HBM (still 8GB is so expensive) Fury X is at the top of charts. But with some hardcore OC?
And common we talk here about 4K not obsolete 1080p. 😉
Cant wait.
Radeon R9 Fury X Runs At 50c Degrees, 32dB – PCB, Liquid Cooling Pump
kinggavin
maybe the fury x dual gpu handle 4k, but whats point of 4k if you gotta turn down settings to get 60 fps anything under 60 fps is no good for gaming in my opinion might as well just buy a console if ur gonna play games at 30-40 fps , right now 4k you need titan x sli thats big price tag to play at 4k 60 fps ultra demanding titles , i think it be the next generation b4 a single card can properly do 60 fps ultra any game at 4k
