![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
Funny thing is, MOST games at 4K DO NOT reach or exceed 4GB unless your cranking the AA all the way up.
Still uses old 2015/2016 titles, the situation will be different if it used late 2017 games, see HardwareUnboxed review, besides GURU3D is known to recycle old numbers anyway.
All you do is shrug, luckily I provided enough links from most known sites to know and prove HardwareUnboxed arrived at the right conclusion.
As if Guru3D looked at all the games? He only looked at 3 titles from 2017, we are talking about 15~20 other titles! that 500%~700% more games in which FuryX chocks.
No he means that with NEW releases the FuryX may not perform where expected because there may be less effort right now to optimize it with the same fervor as before, not stripping away anything as that requires effort AMD is not likely giving at this moment.
Only ALU wise, Geometry is much better in Vega, so if the game is bottleneck by Geometry like most of these games, Fury will still choke.
Looks like that game scales well with more than 4 threads as well.
like most Cryengine 3/4/V Games
the issue with R9 FURY hasnt been the RAM not at 1080p.
In just one game, lets see how it handles the rest of 2018 lineup, it sure is showing it's age in most 2018 titles already"
LOL If I still had my 2 x Furies, they would be doing just fine. However, the single Vega 56 is much better in non crossfire supported games, which are more and more as time goes on.QUICK, PUT OUT THE FIRE!
QUICK, PUT OUT THE FIRE!
impressive you got to list most of these favor Nvidia, but not only that even some have biased because are using UE4 or have poor optimization(WoT?)
if the game which are being tested were unbiased i would say that he is right but no, from root its comparison has flaws so isnt worth discussing. there are better examples which could prove this, i think the comparison is among AMD GPUs from similar generation or AMD vs Nvidia, specially when one lacks of proper optimizationWhat's more impressive is that you didn't provide valid evidence to counter his point, so it stands, despite your flailing
I agree, FuryX is a lot worse in tessellation/Geometry in general but most of the games quoted above have listed AMD GPUs worse than Nvidia this clearly wont show the true problem since it is also crippling AMD GPU capabilities
Most games in the past few years favor NVIDIA, consumers buy games, they don't stop and consider biased games from unbiased games. Also there is no such thing as a biased game. You buy a product and expect it to perform well under all conditions. NVIDIA just happens to be that solution. That's why they remain superior.
Not all games are created equally, different games will stress different architectural traits. Vega for example falls flat on it's face in Kingdom Come. Should all games be like it?