3DMark Firemark Scores Radeon Fury X surfaces - but are they real ?

Published by


The first benchmarks of the AMD Radeon Fury X “Fiji” GPU have been posted yesterday, today however FutureMark 3DMark Firestrike Scores appeared magically shortly thereafter. There are a few things odd about them though.

So the information on GFXBench GPGPU disclosed a product with 4096 Shader processors and a 1 GHz maximum clock frequency. The card is tagged installed as "AMD Radeon Graphics Processor". I do believe these to be true with such a huge GPU.

On the Firestrike results, if it is the real thing, then the Fury X would be marginally faster then a GeForce GTX 980 Ti and slower than the mighty X.

However on the FireStrike screenshot that leaked two things are off, all of the sudden there is a 1050 MHz clock frequency listed (if so, this means the card could be showing overclocked results not the reference clock). But the weird thing is that card is listed as "Generic VGA" indicating a windows base driver is used - which contradicts with the Catalyst driver listed. So the question remains, are these photo-shopped screenhots to gain some quick pageview impressions and popularity, or would it be the real thing ? Well, it's your call to make. It still could be the real thing of course.

Then there are Crossfire results as well. Hey if these are real, then credit where credit is due man. But personally, I am leaning towards fabricated results on these as what are the odds that somebody actually has two Fiji cards setup in Crossfire and leaks the scores, right ? And then ther CFX results end up 'precisely' inbetween the GTX 980 Ti and the X. What are the odds of that happening ? AMD currently is in a military regime mode protecting the cards and content so something doesn't add up. The 3DMark screenshot for Crossfire obviously wasn't shared and you sure as heck would not get it running with a "Generic VGA driver" installation.

Share this content
Twitter Facebook Reddit WhatsApp Email Print