AMD Fury series coming soon.

980 Ti up to 15% faster at my resolution, stock.
Factoring in OC probably closer to 25-30%. :rolleyes:

Currently a better value than even the regular Fury @ $550.
 
limitedaccess said:
Realize this is still speculation but if I had guess AMD likely can benefit relatively more from Win10/DX12. The reason is, if you go by a lot of data availalbe, that AMDs rendering pipeline (whether due to software or hardware differences) does have certain drawbacks compared to Nvidia. You can see some of this in terms of how AMDs products scale up in resolutions (more raw GPU performance determinant).

Now this doesn't AMD might start shooting massively past Nvidia's or anything.

I still go back to what I mentioned earlier. The problem with Fury will not be whether or not it outperforms 980ti, the issue is that it needs to signficantly outperform as I think the market will decide Nvidia's 980ti offers a more compelling package overall if you remove performance and performance/price metrics.

Honestly if you are an AMD product fan (not a fanboy, then you'd just buy anything) I still feel AMDs new lineup prices are somewhat optimistic. Don't be surprised if street prices correct (relatively shortly) to be more favorable. Or that AMD's held back products still to come are better offerings.
Click to expand...

According to [H] VRAM deficiencies are definitely already showing up. So the speculation was absolutely correct.

I don't think DX 12 will solve any hardware limitations.
 
LordEC911 said:
Fury X runs with 980Ti and Titan X at 4k according to HardOCP and HardwareCanucks.
It did its job.
Click to expand...

You're kidding, right?

The new AMD Fiji GPU and Fury X video card looks awesome on paper, but has underwhelmed and disappointed us when it comes to real world gameplay. The AMD Radeon R9 Fury X feels like a proof of concept for HBM technology.
 
madgun said:
According to [H] VRAM deficiencies are definitely already showing up. So the speculation was absolutely correct.

I don't think DX 12 will solve any hardware limitations.
Click to expand...

What speculation are you referring to?

DX12 could in theory provide some VRAM relief due to better memory opimizations (eg. tiled resources). Again this is, like I said, would be speculative as it is dependent on too many third party variables.

VRAM is one aspect of what I was referring to when I mean't comparing Fury X against 980ti as an overall package since performance and performance/price difference is essentially negligible. This is one aspect for example that Fury X needed to compensate for by being signficantly faster.
 
And to think people actually thought this card was gonna beat nvidia hahaha. Was getting worried since I ordered a 980ti yesterday but I had a hunch it was gonna be better and boy oh boy was I right. Goodbye AMD my 6950 crossfire will not be missed.
 
Let's be honest here, it's losing to a stock 980 ti in almost every game tested by this website. This doesn't even take into account after market 980 ti which will push it to 20%+ gap and the sad thing about all this is that it' more than likely costs AMD more money vs nvidia to make their card. Investors aren't going to be happy and frankly, going with hbm was a mistake. If the card used gddr5 and had 8 gb vram and hdmi it would have been more appealing than a hobbled 4 gb card. Another AMD failure.

Edit: Pay close attention to the hard ocp review talking about smoothness, the fury x loses there too.
 
With big Pascal getting through the preparatory work, the big Maxwells are giving a beating to Big Fiji.
 
The card is competitive and runs cool thanks to aio. After reading the [H] review, I will be waiting on the 980 ti Lightning instead.
 
Trades blows with 980 Ti at best and draws more power. Both TPU and Guru3D didn't get much of an OC out of it. I guess nVidia knew exactly what they were doing when they shipped the 980 Ti. Even a factory OC'd 980 Ti (+100~) is going to roll with an OC'd Fury X. If Fury X was $550 and Fury Air was $450, it would really shake up the market but I guess AMD can't afford to sell it that low.

At this rate we'll get a Maxwell refresh and Pascal will get delayed or we'll end up with another OG Titan situation.
 
All I can say is I'm very dissapointed to say the least. IWas really looking forward to it and I was really expecting it to atleast beat the 980 Ti but it barely can. All this hype about revolutionary HBM technology and so, yet it still isn't a clear winner over GDDR5 Maxwell. I feel sorry for AMD, because they must have invested alot into this.

Looks like I won't be cancelling my 2x 980 Ti hybrid orders.
 
limitedaccess said:
What speculation are you referring to?

DX12 could in theory provide some VRAM relief due to better memory opimizations (eg. tiled resources). Again this is, like I said, would be speculative as it is dependent on too many third party variables.

VRAM is one aspect of what I was referring to when I mean't comparing Fury X against 980ti as an overall package since performance and performance/price difference is essentially negligible. This is one aspect for example that Fury X needed to compensate for by being signficantly faster.
Click to expand...

A lot of people speculated 4GB VRAM wasn't enough. VRAM bandwidth doesn't compensate for capacity. I wouldn't be too keen on speculating DX12 will solve all problems on a $649 card.

I agree it needs to be $50-100 less to be competitive. $549 it'd probably sell pretty well. Might as well see who buys it at $649 though.

AMD is making nVidia look better for value purposes... Imagine that.
 
Dayaks said:
A lot of people speculated 4GB VRAM wasn't enough... VRAM bandwidth doesn't compensate for capacity. I wouldn't be too keen on speculating DX12 will solve all problems on a $649 card.

I agree it needs to be $50-100 less to be competitive. $549 it'd probably sell pretty well. Might as well see who buys it at $649 though.
Click to expand...
At least these reviews confirm Fury will not be cut-down.
At $550 I definitely don't think that's an option anymore.
 
To the people that think dx12 is gonna fix this card. Theres not gonna be any demanding dx12 games until next year and by that time hbm 2 will be out. Nvidia will have their hbm card out and that will absolutly destroy this fury. You would have to be insane to buy a fury x right now if you ask me. Glad I ordered my 980ti yesterday before the price increase due to increased demand.
 
Dayaks said:
A lot of people speculated 4GB VRAM wasn't enough... VRAM bandwidth doesn't compensate for capacity. I wouldn't be too keen on speculating DX12 will solve all problems on a $649 card.

I agree it needs to be $50-100 less to be competitive. $549 it'd probably sell pretty well. Might as well see who buys it at $649 though.
Click to expand...

Keep in mind I'm not saying DX12 will erase the VRAM issue. Actually it could go the other way and make it worse due to how lower level APIs handle memory as well (Mantle I believe actually typically uses slightly more VRAM over DX11).

The VRAM was always going to be an issue whether or not it actually was shown to be an issue now unless Fury was signficantly faster or had a large price/performance ratio however. People can accept tradeoffs, but you need something in return. That is the issue here.
 
It's too bad Fury X performane wasn't higher out of the gate. Oh well. I'm still in the process of building my new rig so I have time to see how things shake out in the next month or so.
 
limitedaccess said:
Keep in mind I'm not saying DX12 will erase the VRAM issue. Actually it could go the other way and make it worse due to how lower level APIs handle memory as well (Mantle I believe actually typically uses slightly more VRAM over DX11).

The VRAM was always going to be an issue whether or not it actually was shown to be an issue now unless Fury was signficantly faster or had a large price/performance ratio however. People can accept tradeoffs, but you need something in return. That is the issue here.
Click to expand...

Ahhh gotcha.
 
5150Joker said:
Let's be honest here, it's losing to a stock 980 ti in almost every game tested by this website. This doesn't even take into account after market 980 ti which will push it to 20%+ gap and the sad thing about all this is that it' more than likely costs AMD more money vs nvidia to make their card. Investors aren't going to be happy and frankly, going with hbm was a mistake. If the card used gddr5 and had 8 gb vram and hdmi it would have been more appealing than a hobbled 4 gb card. Another AMD failure.

Edit: Pay close attention to the hard ocp review talking about smoothness, the fury x loses there too.
Click to expand...

This is an overally simplistic look at things however.

Nvidia had to invest in designing Maxwell's memory subsystem and increase the efficiency of its shaders in order to work around (essentially) the limitations in memory bandwidth increases this generation.
 
limitedaccess said:
This is an overally simplistic look at things however.

Nvidia had to invest in designing Maxwell's memory subsystem and increase the efficiency of its shaders in order to work around (essentially) the limitations in memory bandwidth increases this generation.
Click to expand...


As did AMD with Tonga,
 
Well, not really surprised a the results. It's a decent card, just not the slam dunk some people were expecting. To say it's a failure is a bit much though.

It came in roughly where I expected. Will wait and see what the first round of Drivers brings next month. At least AMD have new products out and are competing again.
 
I wouldn't really call it competing.

A 679$ 980 Ti Gaming G1 has a 20% performance advantage over stock 980 Ti. So you can make your own conclusions.
 
Haven't looked at any benchmarks. I assume from the previous dialog, Fury X is 40% faster than Titan X, actually has HDMI 2.0, 4GB HBM is a memory miracle at 4k and literally lines up super models for you? I'd say AMD also drastically improved their drivers but this isn't a fairy tale, don't want to get carried away.
 
madgun said:
I wouldn't really call it competing.

A 679$ 980 Ti Gaming G1 has a 20% performance advantage over stock 980 Ti. So you can make your own conclusions.
Click to expand...

Cons
It's behind in performance to another card in it's own bracket. It has the exact same price tag!
I didn't see it trading blows as in jumping ahead here and falling behind there. That is not a good sign at all.
It's missing HDMI 2.0. Wouldn't give a damn about this, but it adds to the ??? factor.

Pros.
It's wasn't so far behind that the issue could be drivers. Nobody is going to hold your hand AMD until new drivers come out.
The card runs at 56c peak full load. That's awesome, but I didn't give 2 shits about Nvidia cooling so big whup.


In short this card needs to be priced as a GTX 980. If the air cooled version does the same numbers, but runs hotter and is priced into the BTX 980 bracket, then AMD has a win on it's hands. The GTX 980ti is in a class of it's own at this point.

Fury X is NOT recommended at this time in my opinion. The water cooling aspect says HTPC but the lack of HDMI 2.0 says... I have no idea what it says. WTF were they thinking is more like it.
 
Wow, this card.... Such a dissapointment. Slower then a 980TI and sucks at overclocking.

Why would anyone buy this over a TI? The built in cooling?
 
Fuck.

Another
Major
Disappointment

I'm still hungry...the Fury X was a light snack, at best. Serve the Nano!
 
:(

wuOeByq.gif
 
Active HDMI dongles will be useless on a gaming card due to the amount of lag they cause. :(

For gaming you need either native support or passive dongles (which is native support, electrically)

As soon. As you add in active translation it will add lag, and HDMI2 devices are largely 4k HDTV's which have enough input lav of their own as there is, so you really want to minimize other lag in the pipeline.

This is why I was enthusiastically following Fury up until the second I found out it was HDMI 1.4a, when I immediately ordered two 980ti's
 
Considering it's still $100 less than a water cooled 980 Ti at MSRP, and a freesync monitor will cost ~$200 less, I still think the card is a decent deal overall.
 
Any idea on how practically to do a Fury X crossfire solution in a case like 650D by Corsair (or any mid tower case)?
 
frunction said:
Considering it's still $100 less than a water cooled 980 Ti at MSRP, and a freesync monitor will cost ~$200 less, I still think the card is a decent deal overall.
Click to expand...

That's really tying yourself in a knot to try to find an upside. Watercooled 980 Ti price is irrelevant when the $649 air-cooled blows it out of the water and the $679 Gigabyte G1 is 20% faster than that.

I'd suggest reading the [H] review if you haven't yet.
 
DPI said:
That's really tying yourself in a knot to try to find an upside. Watercooled 980 Ti price is irrelevant when the $649 air-cooled blows it out of the water and the $679 Gigabyte G1 is 20% faster than that.

I'd suggest reading the [H] review if you haven't yet.
Click to expand...
980 Ti is also hotter, louder, and about 50% bigger.
Funny how we ignore those downsides when some of those problems were so over-stated about the 290 and 290X. I understand the Fury X being slower takes precedent, but c'mon, these benefits still exist.
 
TaintedSquirrel said:
980 Ti is also hotter, louder, and about 50% bigger.
Funny how we ignore those downsides when some of those problems were so over-stated about the 290 and 290X. I understand the Fury X being slower takes precedent, but c'mon, these benefits still exist.
Click to expand...


Ok the 980ti is louder, hotter-- the GPU temps shouldn't matter squat when the board is using less over all power so that is moot, bigger yes, but if you take into consideration Fury X needed an AIO water to stay competitive that says a lot for AMD's architectural design choices.

The AIO wasn't a "cool" factor for overclocking, it was a necessity for it to compete with the 980 ti.
 
TaintedSquirrel said:
980 Ti is also hotter, louder, and about 50% bigger.
Funny how we ignore those downsides when some of those problems were so over-stated about the 290 and 290X. I understand the Fury X being slower takes precedent, but c'mon, these benefits still exist.
Click to expand...

Did you notice that big radiator hanging from the Fury X? Yeah, that has to fit somewhere and counts toward the size.

Nice try trying to turn around the argument used against 290X for a long time, but doesn't really fit here if we're being honest, since performance isn't there. You could adjust a 980 Ti to near silence and still be beating a Fury X. And you could overclocking a 980 Ti and still be sucking less power than a Fury X.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top