AMD’s Radeon R9 Fury X All Sold Out On First Day Of Launch.

There will always be the initial sale rush. I do not look much into these sold out headlines just due to not even knowing the number of units AMD sent out for the first wave.
 
False advertising leads to false sales hype right? Logical steps....
 
75 units expected here at one seller before 5 july seems right for entusiast cards here.
 
Though I'm not impressed with the Fury X and I will not buy one I'm quite happy to see it is selling, AMD needs to do everything to regain market share. It's not like the Fury X is a complete dud, it does run on par against the Titan X and 980TI and even slightly outperforms both cards in some tests.
 
ChronoDetector said:
Though I'm not impressed with the Fury X and I will not buy one I'm quite happy to see it is selling, AMD needs to do everything to regain market share. It's not like the Fury X is a complete dud, it does run on par against the Titan X and 980TI and even slightly outperforms both cards in some tests.
Click to expand...

Uhh.. you must have not seen the [H] review.
 
Syphon Filter said:
The question is why? Why would you buy one of these over a 980Ti?
Click to expand...

One reason I can think of: Pairing it with a FreeSync monitor.

G-Sync +980ti would cost more than a FreeSync + Fury X, and there are quite a selection of FreeSync monitors, especially in the 4k area.

However, one can also argue that Fury X doesn't play nice with Crossfire due to the space requirement for two radiators, AND currently FreeSync doesn't work with Crossfire at all.
 
Without knowing how many were actually made, who cares?
We had tons of low supply rumors the last few weeks.
 
I agree, but I was really addressing the issue of will prices skyrocket because of it. Got to think of the little guy who wants one. ;)
 
Love how there's no mention of how many cards the retailers had in stock? Did it sell out when each retailer had 500 cards in stock? Or did it sell out with retailers having 5 cards in stock. Thinking it's the second option...
 
No actual sales numbers? So what, they sold out of the entire 10 cards they had in stock? lol ooooo good job AMD!

Edit: Ooops, Pando wins @ interneting lol.
 
According to a transcript that Tainted Squirrel posted, Newegg had 100 of them. Considering they are one of the larger retailers they were probably allocated more units.
 
that transcript show a re-order, not how many they had initially.
 
I don't see what they would be ordering their first batch on the 23rd for a card being sold the next day. What are the odds of even getting them in stock in time? Unless it says 23rd of last month.
 
cageymaru said:
I guess people really are into cooler running cards. /shrugs
Click to expand...

That's a very disingenuous statement. According to the H review, the card consumes a notable amount more power (15-20%) and that is, per the laws of physics, converted to heat output. Yes, it has a more efficient mechanism for moving that heat away from the gpu, but it's still a hotter card dispersing more heat. I am excited to see HBM in the wild, but particularly am awaiting HBM2 before buying any cards from either camp at this point :D.
 
Syphon Filter said:
The question is why? Why would you buy one of these over a 980Ti?
Click to expand...

Amateur reviewers, fanbois, eBay gougers hoping to make a quick buck on the low initial volume situation.

Who cares how someone else spends their money.
 
What golden tiger said. Also you're comparing temps as if the the 980 runs hot. As far as I'm concerned both gpus are within acceptable temp ranges. The only reason I would need my card to run cooler is for more overclocking headroom, which fury doesn't seem to have anyways.
 
DPI said:
Amateur reviewers, fanbois, eBay gougers hoping to make a quick buck on the low initial volume of cards.

Who cares how someone else spends their money.
Click to expand...

Words of wisdom... ultimately it really doesn't matter what someone else has in their system, even if it isn't a smart choice in others' eyes. Right or wrong objectively or subjectively, someone else making a great buy, or a horrible buy, doesn't change what you have yourself. Obviously, it can impact market trends, but on a practical basis, changing just one or two peoples' purchasing decision to match yours won't really affect those due to the scale. Live and let live :p.
 
xLokiX said:
A re-order before release? It says that they were ordered on the 23rd.
Click to expand...

Right, and the guy was asking about restock,because they sold out.

They probobly put the order in to hit right at release.
 
GoldenTiger said:
Words of wisdom... ultimately it really doesn't matter what someone else has in their system, even if it isn't a smart choice in others' eyes. Right or wrong objectively or subjectively, someone else making a great buy, or a horrible buy, doesn't change what you have yourself. Obviously, it can impact market trends, but on a practical basis, changing just one or two peoples' purchasing decision to match yours won't really affect those due to the scale. Live and let live :p.
Click to expand...

Yeah, it's one thing when we go back and forth between team Red and Green talking technical strengths and weaknesses of various GPU's, like rival sports fans arguing about which team has the better players and season or whatever, but you're stepping over a line into batshit when you start hoping the other side will fail, or when you imply or outright call people idiots for buying your non preferred brand.

When I first discovered computers at a young age, I didn't give a shit about brand - I was simply a fan of and awed by new technology. Kinda miss those days.
 
Last edited:
Shantarr.Dalrae said:
I sure am, that's why I'm waiting for this to come back in stock:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814487144
Click to expand...

If I was AMD I would of did that format. AIO + Fan then OC'd the shit out of it out of the factory. At least maybe they would of won stock vs. stock. Maybe fancooled the 100C VRMs and AIO'd the chip.

It's like they went 90% of the way there... of course I could be talking out my ass since the thing is voltage locked (IMO for safety/RMA reasons). Maybe it OC's poorly with extra voltage. 1050 seems kinda low though.

I think the most disheartening thing for me is the 4GB HBM VRAM. Extra cost for no performance gain. Lowers my opinion of any kind of rational decision making by AMD's management.
 
DPI said:
Amateur reviewers, fanbois, eBay gougers hoping to make a quick buck on the low initial volume situation.

Who cares how someone else spends their money.
Click to expand...

Or people that don't just play Nvidia sponsored titles, like the ones [H] used?
 
Remon said:
Or people that don't just play Nvidia sponsored titles, like the ones [H] used?
Click to expand...

Like BF4 that it still failed miserably on? I would rather see benchmarks for games that people play. No one cares about tomb raider performance lol.
 
Kardonxt said:
Like BF4 that it still failed miserably on?
Click to expand...

You mean the 1 game that isn't Nvidia sponsored in the whole suite, and where the Fury is slower by 3 fps in 4k. While everyone is crying about the 4GB vram.
 
This doesn't surprise me. There will be people who will buy it regardless of the reviews and fan boys of AMD that will buy these cards simply because they are AMD loyalists. In some cases people will buy them because they hate NVIDIA and believe AMD is the lesser of two evils. I don't really understand the personification of a company. They are all comprised of people looking out for themselves first and shareholders second. Neither of these companies cares about you beyond being able to entice you into buying something and keeping you just happy enough to continue doing so.

My take on this is that the R9 Fury X is slower than it's NVIDIA counterpart by a decent amount in some games and by a small amount in others. It isn't a bad card but there isn't a compelling reason to get one while its priced the same as the faster 980Ti. As for people "crying" about only having 5GB of RAM, I think that's justified. If you aren't gaming at 4K then it isn't as big of a deal. If you are gaming at 4K we are seeing games use up to 6GB and in rare cases more than that. At 4K gaming the memory size of the R9 Fury X doesn't make sense. I don't see that crying as much as being logical about the situation. Regardless of the outcome of any NVIDIA vs. AMD discussion, loyalists for either brand will justify their actions in some way or another. Whatever helps them sleep at night I guess.
 
Last edited:
Dan_D said:
As for people "crying" about only having 4GB of RAM, I think that's justified. If you aren't gaming at 4K then it isn't as big of a deal. If you are gaming at 4K we are seeing games use up to 6GB and in rare cases more than that. At 4K gaming the memory size of the R9 Fury X doesn't make sense.
Click to expand...

That's why I used "crying". Because there is nothing showing that the Fury is slowed by the 4GB at 4k. As I said, [H]'s review, which has probably the worst results for the Fury, puts it at 5% slower than the 980ti at 4k, while it is much slower at 1080p. Techpowerup with a much bigger game sample for example has the Fury at 2% slower than the 980ti, and right on par when you remove Pcars, which runs notoriously bad on AMD.
 
Dan_D said:
This doesn't surprise me. There will be people who will buy it regardless of the reviews and fan boys of AMD that will buy these cards simply because they are AMD loyalists. In some cases people will buy them because they hate NVIDIA and believe AMD is the lesser of two evils. I don't really understand the personification of a company. They are all comprised of people looking out for themselves first and shareholders second. Neither of these companies cares about you beyond being able to entice you into buying something and keeping you just happy enough to continue doing so.

My take on this is that the R9 Fury X is slower than it's NVIDIA counterpart by a decent amount in some games and by a small amount in others. It isn't a bad card but there isn't a compelling reason to get one while its priced the same as the faster 980Ti. As for people "crying" about only having 5GB of RAM, I think that's justified. If you aren't gaming at 4K then it isn't as big of a deal. If you are gaming at 4K we are seeing games use up to 6GB and in rare cases more than that. At 4K gaming the memory size of the R9 Fury X doesn't make sense. I don't see that crying as much as being logical about the situation. Regardless of the outcome of any NVIDIA vs. AMD discussion, loyalists for either brand will justify their actions in some way or another. Whatever helps them sleep at night I guess.
Click to expand...

Come on logic is not welcome lol. When you bring real fire power (facts) all the fanboys can really be seen.
 
GoldenTiger said:
That's a very disingenuous statement. According to the H review, the card consumes a notable amount more power (15-20%) and that is, per the laws of physics, converted to heat output. Yes, it has a more efficient mechanism for moving that heat away from the gpu, but it's still a hotter card dispersing more heat. I am excited to see HBM in the wild, but particularly am awaiting HBM2 before buying any cards from either camp at this point :D.
Click to expand...

15-20%?

http://www.hardocp.com/article/2015/06/24/amd_radeon_r9_fury_x_video_card_review/10#.VYxpGPlVhBc

shows 380 average, and 1 peak of 411, even at 411, that's 10%, not 15-20
at the average of 380, it's less than 3% difference.
 
GoldenTiger said:
That's a very disingenuous statement. According to the H review, the card consumes a notable amount more power (15-20%) and that is, per the laws of physics, converted to heat output. Yes, it has a more efficient mechanism for moving that heat away from the gpu, but it's still a hotter card dispersing more heat. I am excited to see HBM in the wild, but particularly am awaiting HBM2 before buying any cards from either camp at this point :D.
Click to expand...

I know and agree with you. That's why I shrugged it off. ;)
 
Digital Viper-X- said:
shows 380 average, and 1 peak of 411, even at 411, that's 10%, not 15-20
at the average of 380, it's less than 3% difference.
Click to expand...

The problem is it shows 411 on the table, and it says 380 in the text below it. People just like to look at tables more than reading text.
 
Maybe its a dumb mental thing but i just cant conceive of buying such a nice card with only 4gb of ram. A $650+ dollar card? They bump all the 300 series cards to 8gb cause they needed it then release there flag ship card with half that? My credit card is not even tempted.:) These cards will be under $400 by next year (if not lower:D)
 
Remon said:
You mean the 1 game that isn't Nvidia sponsored in the whole suite, and where the Fury is slower by 3 fps in 4k. While everyone is crying about the 4GB vram.
Click to expand...

Yeah, you know the one that people are actually playing like the rest of the games benchmarked by Hardocp? The one that was 24 frames slower on a res more people play at? How many people are going to buy the Fury x for 4k BF4 only when it delivers poor frame rates at 4k in other big titles? I'm sorry that Nvidia sponsors more games and they happen to be the popular / demanding games people are playing. I finished tomb raider, Bioshock, and Theif all over a year ago and without any decent multiplayer they don't really have the replay value to make them relevant. And even then these other review sites are using canned benchmarks and not actual game play; in some cases even old nvidia drivers.

Fury X is not the worst thing since aids like some people are shouting but it's nothing special and certainly not as good as a 980ti.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top