Crossfire (2x) R390X vs Crossfire (2x) R9 Fury X

H

hari09

n00b
Joined
Feb 28, 2016
Messages
4
Which one is good and has a better performance and memory?

I've already ask my friends and others but I'm still confuse which one is better.

Recommendations/comments are well appreciated.
 
There is a video card section on this forum. If I were to Crossfire I would choose 2x 390x so that I have 8gb of video memory. Newer games are using more and more memory. If the DX 12 multi GPU takes off where you can combine the memory of both cards the Fury X would be a clear winner.
 
Oh I thought it can help me here. One of my friend said that Fury X's low amount of memory doesn't matter because of the memory bandwidth afforded by HBM memory. Fury X has enough VRAM for games even at max settings at 4K.
 
No. HBM is not magical and does not allow you to store more data. Speed can not replace capacity. If your game needs more then 4gb of memory, ie Arkham Knight, Rise of the Tomb Raider, Quantum Break, then it will have to be stored in system memory. If you have played either of these games you know how famous the hitching and stuttering is trying to load stuff back and forth from system ram.
 
Last edited:
atom said:
No. HBM is not magical and does not allow you to store more data. Speed can not replace capacity. If your game needs more then 4gb of memory, ie Arkham Knight, Rise of the Tomb Raider, Quantum Break, then it will have to be stored in system memory. If you have played either of these games you know how famous the hitching and stuttering is trying to load stuff back and forth from system ram.
Click to expand...

Yeah I think your right. Thanks, I really appreciate your replies.
 
atom said:
No. HBM is not magical and does not allow you to store more data. Speed can not replace capacity. If your game needs more then 4gb of memory, ie Arkham Knight, Rise of the Tomb Raider, Quantum Break, then it will have to be stored in system memory. If you have played either of these games you know how famous the hitching and stuttering is trying to load stuff back and forth from system ram.
Click to expand...

Have you ever used a card with hbm? What you just said is actuslly bs.

OP take it from someone using fury x crossfire since sept/oct. I have YET to see 4 gigs of hbm maxed out in anything 4k. I just beat batman arkham knight 0 stuttering vram no where closed to max. Beat gta v 2x msaa and vram no where close to maxed I'm at the point where I actuslly want to see it get maxed out.

4 gigs of hbm does not function like 4 gigs of ddr5, period. Hbm uses a ridiculous amount less of vram than ddr5. I would be happy to show proof.

It'd easy yo overlook something you don't care about. Hard forums reviews don't even test vram numbers but constantly slam the fury x for vram buffer.

And no, I didnt not get excessive system ram usage. What you said happens on gtx 970. On my 970 sli games would use over 12 gigs of my ram cuz it was constantly using it. I have yet to see system ram go over 10 gigs
 
Last edited:
Same test pc, same settings, same resolution, watch the vram and system ram numbers

Dying Light will use around 6 gigs of ddr5

Fury x



980 (some settings turned down vram Still maxed)





980 ti



Titan x



Dying light can almost use all 6 gigs of 980 ti ddr5 but no 4 gigs of hbm?!?

This is the trend with every fury x video on youtubr, this is also the case in every game I've played. If this isn't enough I can do more games
 
Last edited:
Have you considered the drivers may be simply filling the available VRAM?
 
That's why I showed cards with 4gb ddr5, 6gb ddr5, and 12GB ddr5 and it tops out around 6gb in this game ddr5. Even with settings turned down 4gb ddr5 is still maxed in the video. Same thing with shadows of mordor, every game will be an example of this lol. I have cards with 4gb ddr5 myself as well, the difference is clear. Again I have yet to see any game max 4gb hbm @ 4k in almost 6 months
 
Last edited:
What Ocellaris is saying is that monitor software reports back how much Video Ram has been allocated, not actually in use. Also, games detect how much VRAM you have and often do not attempt to go over that amount. I can not view your videos from here I will comment later at home. I also want to point out that comparing AMD to nVidia is going to support different feature sets, most notably gameworks. Gameworks features will definitely gobble up VRAM.
 
The settings are the same on both setups.....What you're saying is the same excuse [H] gives to test not vram numbers. So now people are basically just saying its pointless to even monitor vram. I understand the whole allocation vs vram being use, still doesn't change the fact that I have yet to see my hbm reach 4 gigs. I cNt think of any times i have even seen it reach 3.9 gig. Dying light uses over 4 gigs, the only card that can't do max settings is the 980 Even with settings turned down

Rise of the Tomb Raider Video Card Performance Review @ [H]
 
Last edited:
the 390x is a unbalanced card from memory vs processing power perspective in a single card installation, that what makes it great in multi card configs.

if u want cross fire, the 390x is relatively a better choice. u will not run out of memory while u gain the advantage of the second GPU. for fury it is hard to claim the same.
 
I don't have enough experience with either of those cards (I have a single 290x which seems sufficient for my 1440p, in-game settings maxed out etc), but I would suggest that if you can afford to wait until the next generation of video cards from AMD and Nvidia alike, assuming you're buying high end, then you will not only have yet another iteration's upgrades but all your cards will be using HBM. Yoou won't have to choose between more conventional GDDR5 and lesser amounts of HBM. With Vulkan (and to somee extent, DX12) hopefully memory manufacturers have figured out that, with the coming of 4K, it is going to behoove them to load up their high tier cards full of lots of HBM.
 
Ok brother, your videos are useless as they are completely different scenes. Nonetheless, in the [H] article you mention they show how because these 4GB cards dont have enough memory, system RAM is allocated for virtual VRAM. That is why they don't "need as much" as the other cards with more memory. That DDR3/4 is a heck of a lot slower for video than GDDR5/HBM last that I checked. I will acknowledge that if HBM is so so so fast like it is supposed to be, that the faster memory will make up for SOME of the slower memory's draw time. Make sense? I'm almost meeting you in the middle here.
 
Those videos are only useless to naysayers who never played the game or use hbm and are tryingg to prove doubt. Those videos are spot on with real world numbers. It's an open world game all on the first level at the beginning

Also what you are describing is what happens with the gtx 970. It does use system ram but not the same way the fury x does. So you dont get those outrageous system ram usage numbers. Did you even bother to watch the system ram usage in the videos?

[H] says when the system ram is used it acts as a direct cache instead of instant vram. When I used gtx 970 anytime I shifted something to system ram there was a huge slow down. As well as system ram numbers I have yet to see since I got rid of them. Almost every game would result around 14 gigs of system ram usage

At least I provided some kind of proof. You can deny and I can do more vids but all of them reflect this. It's time you backed up your claims
 
Last edited:
Conclusion

Hard says this is the first game they have seen it work like this. I say it's the first time they actually looked.

 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top