That is what I was expecting, and that is what anyone else would have done.Originally Posted by CAT-THE-FIFTH
Problem with waiting for driver improvements is that it gives Nvidia time to come up with driver improvements, so I don't that that ever works.
The fact that TechReport found BF4 worked better with Mantle turned off is, erm, interesting
looking at the only performance which matters to me - 4k , furyx is the one to have , as it can only get better with drivers
Source? The cost of the interposer is a new cost, but there are savings in other areas like smaller PCB with fewer layers. We don't know the BOM and at the end of the day it doesn't matter to consumers. Someone had to be first with it and first-adopters inevitably pay more before production ramps and costs drop.
No. http://media.bestofmicro.com/J/Q/506...iew-Gaming.png
Just thought of something..how is AMD back in the big league ?
This card is absolute joke the more I look into it, and is in fact a botch job. They tout it as a 4K capable card, but only give it 4GB VRAM ? That makes no sense! They put 8GB on the 390X (and some of the 290X's even had it) but only 4GB on this ? 4GB and 6GB cards have been round long enough that the point of VRAM usage at 4K being high is not something you can debate any more, it is a FACT.
They talk about how it's not the same, HBM negates the high VRAM usage, and that is the talk of a dunce. That's like saying DDR4 negates RAM usage of DDR3. It doesn't matter how much more efficient or speedy it is, if there isn't enough of it, it's going to be a bottleneck.
This card is useless for 4K and an absolute failure. 4GB VRAM will have cost them this race.
Maybe driver updates will help out AMD a bit in the next couple of months? At least, the Fury X 4GB gives the 980 Ti 6GB a run for its money and overtakes the 980 4GB on Rome 2(main game of interest for me).. and beats the 980 Ti 6GB in other games like Mordor, Witcher, Tomb Riader on 4K res. A pretty good card imo but will be overpriced. I wonder how the 8GB will perform!
Have you actually bothered to check the performance of this card at 4k in benchmarks? I'd guess not...
This review is pretty bad tbh, go check out HardOCP. 4GB VRAM is useless for 4K gaming
I've looked at reviews on other sites. HardOCP says it best
Well, based on this review alone as it's the only one I've seen so far, it looks like it's going to be a pretty good competitor to the 980 Ti. I wonder what it costed to design and make this thing though, with that Hbm and water cooler.. I am thinking Amd will have to keep this thing a bit more cheaper than the 980 Ti than it already is to stay competative. I hope that doesn't mean more losses for them :/
Still, we need to get into DirectX 12 to see how these cards really stack up against eachother. It's early days for comparisons.. Not to mention driver improvements..
And, the shader thing, could that be to combat Nvidia Gameworks? Is it the shaders that do the Tesselation stuff?
Also, I was surprised you guys weren't able to OC the memory! Once that becomes available, we could start to see people getting even more out of these cards.
I'm gonna watch things pan out over the rest of summer to see what the Fury X can really do...
Where do they say anything of the sort, let alone demonstrate it?
They have a rant about memory amount yet it contradicts their benchmarks (and those of other sites) where it proves not to be an issue.
Anyone seen actual prices listed yet?
Scan have "pre-order" £546.62 on all their cards.
http://www.scan.co.uk/shop/computer-...9-fury-x-pci-e
Yet nobody else found that to be the case?
Edit - actually they didn't either? Fury is pretty competitive at 4K on [H] (loses by 5.6%), it's the lower resolutions where it's falling down same as everywhere else.
At TPU it's dead even at 4K. At HardwareCanucks it's 2% slower at 4K (because of a bad performance in Dying Light which appears to be a real problem game).
At Toms it's 5% faster at 4K! There is absolutely zero evidence of 4GB VRAM not being enough.
Last edited by Jimbo75; 24-06-2015 at 03:39 PM.
Well thats shot up, you could pick one up this morning for £512 lol
orly? I have a 4k screen and game well on my 4GB GTX 980 - in the games I play
and ofc you do understand the MASSIVE tech differences between the 20 year tech in GDDR5 and the brand new tech in HBM .....
Hehe.
Well NovaTech have them supposedly in stock. At ~£650 I think their dollar conversion rate from rrp is not compatible with mine and I will pass
http://www.novatech.co.uk/products/c...r9furyxseries/
It's interesting that both Nvidia and AMD responded to their fabrication partners problems by stripping out double-precision performance to maximise single-precision/gaming on a set node.
Perhaps it's an indicator that the consumer and professional lines will diverge further moving forward, to maximise performance for each market.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
Reply With Quote