Page 1 of 9 1234 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 16 of 131

Thread: AMD Radeon R9 Fury X 4GB

  1. #1
    HEXUS.admin
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    31,245
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    2,006 times in 711 posts

    AMD Radeon R9 Fury X 4GB

    AMD back in the big league.
    Read more.

  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    1,540
    Thanks
    54
    Thanked
    285 times in 178 posts
    • Jasp's system
      • CPU:
      • i5 3570k @ 3.4GHZ
      • Memory:
      • 8GB DDR3 1600MHZ
      • Storage:
      • 1 x 512Gb Crucial MX100 1 x 2TB HDD
      • Graphics card(s):
      • EVGA GTX 670 SC
      • PSU:
      • 850W Corsair HX
      • Case:
      • Coolmaster Haf X V2
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 7 64-Bit
      • Monitor(s):
      • Dell U2412M 1920X1200
      • Internet:
      • 6Mb ADSL

    Re: AMD Radeon R9 Fury X 4GB

    Well a tad underwhelming to say the least, was expecting it to tip the 980ti off the top spot which at the moment looks the better buy with HDMI 2 and Direct X 12.1. Maybe next year.

    Also why no 390X results in the chart?

  3. #3
    Team HEXUS.net
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    1,383
    Thanks
    69
    Thanked
    381 times in 211 posts

    Re: AMD Radeon R9 Fury X 4GB

    They were tested anachronistically - Fury X first - and the 390X would be the only non-reference card. I will however add it in.

  4. #4
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    780
    Thanks
    30
    Thanked
    49 times in 38 posts

    Re: AMD Radeon R9 Fury X 4GB

    Quote Originally Posted by Jasp View Post
    Well a tad underwhelming to say the least, was expecting it to tip the 980ti off the top spot which at the moment looks the better buy with HDMI 2 and Direct X 12.1. Maybe next year.
    I agree it's underwhelming but I sorta knew it was heading for that last week so no great surprise.

    If you really need HDMI 2 you can get an adapter. DirectX 12 is heavily based on Mantle - how can Nvidia cards be better equipped than AMD's for it? They don't even have asynchronous shaders which will be a mainstay of the API.

  5. #5
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    1,540
    Thanks
    54
    Thanked
    285 times in 178 posts
    • Jasp's system
      • CPU:
      • i5 3570k @ 3.4GHZ
      • Memory:
      • 8GB DDR3 1600MHZ
      • Storage:
      • 1 x 512Gb Crucial MX100 1 x 2TB HDD
      • Graphics card(s):
      • EVGA GTX 670 SC
      • PSU:
      • 850W Corsair HX
      • Case:
      • Coolmaster Haf X V2
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 7 64-Bit
      • Monitor(s):
      • Dell U2412M 1920X1200
      • Internet:
      • 6Mb ADSL

    Re: AMD Radeon R9 Fury X 4GB

    Quote Originally Posted by Tarinder View Post
    They were tested anachronistically - Fury X first - and the 390X would be the only non-reference card. I will however add it in.
    Ah different review embargoes cool.

    I agree it's underwhelming but I sorta knew it was heading for that last week so no great surprise.

    If you really need HDMI 2 you can get an adapter. DirectX 12 is heavily based on Mantle - how can Nvidia cards be better equipped than AMD's for it? They don't even have asynchronous shaders which will be a mainstay of the API.
    From what i understand DX12 is built from the ground up by Microsoft, it basically does the same thing as Mantle but is not the same. What will be interesting is how this performs against the 980ti in DX12 as on paper the Fury should be quite a bit faster then it.

  6. #6
    Bagnaj97
    Guest

    Re: AMD Radeon R9 Fury X 4GB

    So the 980ti wins in every single benchmark at 1080p, that's a shame. The extra bandwidth from HBM pays off and the Fury X catches up as you crank the resolution, but I suspect the vast majority of gamers are still "only" on 1080p.

    Any idea when we'll see pricing and reviews of the R9 Nano?

  7. #7
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Manchester
    Posts
    1,471
    Thanks
    25
    Thanked
    88 times in 71 posts
    • Percy1983's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Gigabyte x570 Aorus Pro
      • CPU:
      • AMD 3700x + Cooler Master Nepton 140XL
      • Memory:
      • 64GB (4x16GB ) Corsair Vengence 3200mhz @ 3600mhz CL16
      • Storage:
      • 500GB Silicon Power NVME + 2x 4tb Raid 0 (2tbx2) arrays with 250gb Silicon Power NVME cache
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Vega 56 Red Dragon
      • PSU:
      • 875w Thermaltake Toughpower XT
      • Case:
      • Thermaltake Level 10 GT Snow Edition
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 10 Pro 64bit
      • Monitor(s):
      • 24" Acer UHD x2
      • Internet:
      • Talk Talk!

    Re: AMD Radeon R9 Fury X 4GB

    Maybe driver improvements and dx12 will boost it but I really was expecting more.

    With that if the price is right for the performance in usual AMD style its not a disaster as such, would have been nice to have the top spot as a halo product.

  8. #8
    IQ: 1.42
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    old trafford
    Posts
    1,317
    Thanks
    132
    Thanked
    94 times in 80 posts
    • Tunnah's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Asus somethingorother
      • CPU:
      • 3700X
      • Memory:
      • 16GB 3600
      • Storage:
      • Various SSDs, 90TB RAID6 HDDs
      • Graphics card(s):
      • 1080Ti
      • PSU:
      • Silverstone 650w
      • Case:
      • Lian-Li PC70B
      • Operating System:
      • Win10
      • Internet:
      • 40mbit Sky Fibre

    Re: AMD Radeon R9 Fury X 4GB

    Don't care about power usages or temp or any of that, it's just not something I notice. I care about performance, and if they're at a stalemate I'll go with nvidia because of superior driver support.

    It looks like a stalemate so I'd choose the 980Ti. It's a shame because I really wanted them to do better. HBM sounded great, and the more competition, the harder a company has to push itself.

  9. #9
    Senior Member watercooled's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    11,337
    Thanks
    1,529
    Thanked
    1,003 times in 855 posts

    Re: AMD Radeon R9 Fury X 4GB

    Quote Originally Posted by Jasp View Post
    Well a tad underwhelming to say the least, was expecting it to tip the 980ti off the top spot which at the moment looks the better buy with HDMI 2 and Direct X 12.1. Maybe next year.
    There's no such thing as DirectX 12.1. Feature levels are arbitrary values, unimportant to end users and nothing to do with game compatibility.
    Last edited by watercooled; 24-06-2015 at 02:06 PM.

  10. #10
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    2,067
    Thanks
    12
    Thanked
    102 times in 91 posts

    Re: AMD Radeon R9 Fury X 4GB

    Price will be a major factor now I'd say, personally I'd still go nvidia over the fury x purely due to graphics ram and better dx support giving arguably a longer lifespan for a 'high end card'. I'd also class 4GB as the bare minimum for a high end card these days, the whole reason is to play at faster framerates and/or better quality so this could potentially be a limiting factor within a year.

  11. #11
    root Member DanceswithUnix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    In the middle of a core dump
    Posts
    12,023
    Thanks
    673
    Thanked
    1,331 times in 1,133 posts
    • DanceswithUnix's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Asus X470-PRO
      • CPU:
      • 3700X
      • Memory:
      • 32GB 3200MHz ECC
      • Storage:
      • 1TB Linux, 1TB Games (Win 10)
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Asus Strix RX Vega 56
      • PSU:
      • 650W Corsair TX
      • Case:
      • Antec 300
      • Operating System:
      • Fedora 33 + Win 10 Pro 64 (yuk)
      • Monitor(s):
      • Benq XL2730Z 1440p + Iiyama 27" 1440p
      • Internet:
      • Zen 80Mb/20Mb VDSL

    Re: AMD Radeon R9 Fury X 4GB

    Would love to see how it compared to a pair of R9 380 cards in crossfire, as that comes in a bit cheaper, has nearly as many shaders, the same 4GB per gpu limit, but higher overall tdp (where I don't care about energy costs but would be fine with that if it meant the performance was better).

  12. #12
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Liverpool
    Posts
    1,019
    Thanks
    33
    Thanked
    26 times in 20 posts
    • [DW]Cougho's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Asus Crosshair VI Hero
      • CPU:
      • AMD Ryzen 3600 @ 4.3 1900 FLCK
      • Memory:
      • 16GB Team Group DDR4 @ 3800 C16
      • Storage:
      • 512GB Samsung 870 EVO NVME & 1TB Samsung 850 Evo
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Gigabyte GTX1070 G1 Gaming
      • PSU:
      • Corsair AX760
      • Case:
      • Silverstone FT-05B
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 10
      • Monitor(s):
      • BenQ XL2730Z 1440p 144Hz
      • Internet:
      • BT Infinity 1

    Re: AMD Radeon R9 Fury X 4GB

    A tad disappointing. I expected it to sit between the reference 980Ti and the vendor overclocked 980Ti's. It's not really any cheaper than the 980Ti either - only really relevant for AMD fans and Freesync monitor owners I'd say.

    I really wanted this to do well too, I'm looking at upgrading my monitor alongside a graphics card upgrade and while the 980Ti would be my graphics card choice I don't fancy investing into G-Sync - I much prefer the Freesync standard.

  13. #13
    root Member DanceswithUnix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    In the middle of a core dump
    Posts
    12,023
    Thanks
    673
    Thanked
    1,331 times in 1,133 posts
    • DanceswithUnix's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Asus X470-PRO
      • CPU:
      • 3700X
      • Memory:
      • 32GB 3200MHz ECC
      • Storage:
      • 1TB Linux, 1TB Games (Win 10)
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Asus Strix RX Vega 56
      • PSU:
      • 650W Corsair TX
      • Case:
      • Antec 300
      • Operating System:
      • Fedora 33 + Win 10 Pro 64 (yuk)
      • Monitor(s):
      • Benq XL2730Z 1440p + Iiyama 27" 1440p
      • Internet:
      • Zen 80Mb/20Mb VDSL

    Re: AMD Radeon R9 Fury X 4GB

    Quote Originally Posted by Bagnaj97 View Post
    So the 980ti wins in every single benchmark at 1080p, that's a shame. The extra bandwidth from HBM pays off and the Fury X catches up as you crank the resolution, but I suspect the vast majority of gamers are still "only" on 1080p.

    Any idea when we'll see pricing and reviews of the R9 Nano?
    Do you think people who can drop half a grand on a video card as well as the high end CPU etc to drive it will have a single 1080p monitor?

  14. #14
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    780
    Thanks
    30
    Thanked
    49 times in 38 posts

    Re: AMD Radeon R9 Fury X 4GB

    Quote Originally Posted by Bagnaj97 View Post
    So the 980ti wins in every single benchmark at 1080p, that's a shame. The extra bandwidth from HBM pays off and the Fury X catches up as you crank the resolution, but I suspect the vast majority of gamers are still "only" on 1080p.
    If you're gaming on 1080p with these you really ought to be upscaling with DSR/VSR which is basically the same thing.

  15. #15
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    285
    Thanks
    16
    Thanked
    23 times in 21 posts

    Re: AMD Radeon R9 Fury X 4GB

    Quote Originally Posted by LSG501 View Post
    I'd also class 4GB as the bare minimum for a high end card these days


    4GB GDDR5 =/= 4GB HBM

  16. #16
    Senior Member watercooled's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    11,337
    Thanks
    1,529
    Thanked
    1,003 times in 855 posts

    Re: AMD Radeon R9 Fury X 4GB

    I'll just add this for 'DircxtX support' concerns: http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/2...d-dont-deliver

    Feature levels have always been there and never really marketed to end users before because they really don't matter. It's silly that it's been turned into a marketing bullet point TBH. AMD could easily argue the toss as GCN is a higher 'tier'.

Page 1 of 9 1234 ... LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •