- Joined
- May 18, 1997
- Messages
- 55,635
We who? Do you have some benchmarks to share?
He's been here for 8 years, he gets to say "we."
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
We who? Do you have some benchmarks to share?
There is a strong hate in this thread for the Fury X. It being outperformed by the 980ti is not enough, so any news of potential performance increases for the Fury X must be delegitimized and ridiculed immediately. I just don't get it...........
Welcome to the internet*, fixed that for you.Welcome to hardforum...the Fury hate has gone full retard.
Welcome to the internet*, fixed that for you.
People looooove to hate AMD. They love it. There must always be a winner and a loser... They can put their minds at ease knowing AMD is a complete clusterfuck; the worse AMD gets, the more they can justify their Nvidia purchases. I know it's true because I feel the opposite owning a 280X right now.
People say they don't want a monopoly but in reality that's exactly what they want. They want AMD to fail as much as humanly possible without going bankrupt. At this point, AMD solely exists to make Nvidia look better.
I personally think most of the fury hate is due to the fact it wont cause Nvidia to lower their prices and thus they have to pay the higher price for the cards right now. I actually think AMD scored a huge win with this card by not having to get into a price war. I still think both these cards are not enough of a difference over my 290x to matter anyway, but I only use a 1080p monitor. I dont care who makes the video card over $600 for a single gpu card is nuts. The mid range cards are where the real fight is and the 390x and 970 (maybe 980 as well) are the contenders for the average guys buck.
NVIDIA controls 75% of the GPU market anyways, and with prices as-is the 980 Ti is almost always sold out on NewEgg/Amazon. I doubt they will cut prices for market share, they don't need it. I would rather have the profits were I in their position.
My anti fanboy detector went off, I just serviced the request.
Sorry it offended you.
No offense but why should any of us care? If your business puts out uncompetitive products and you aren't economically viable that's not my problem. The employees are still getting paid this whole time and if AMD was to fold they all work in tech so they'd find other jobs.
I'm not saying I want AMD to go under - quite the contrary - but don't bring emotional nonsense into an objective discussion of product quality.
No offense. Sorry if I didn't agree with you and that's causing you concern.
You seem to have drifted off of what was being discussed. This wasn't about the product but the way the subjective analysis was presented.
I'm not being emotional (at all) and if you think it's nonsense then just ignore it. Learn to deal with people disagreeing with [H] sometimes. It doesn't mean I don't respect [H]'s reviews or come here first (or 2nd) to see [H]'s results.
Also, if somehow Fury doesn't seem competitive then maybe you need to compare results in more than a few games and from more reviewers. We're talking a few % overall, and depending on he situation that few % can be in either direction, and Fury does bring a much cooler and quieter solution to the market. Last gen that seemed to be the most important measurement.
Agreed. Seems objectivity doesn't make an entrance here. Ok so the 980Ti is the better performer to varying degrees at different resolutions. But saying the Fury is a Failure is neither objective nor accurate. Had the Fury performed at 970/960 territory then yes the description: failure would apply.
So far it is selling and in most case selling out quickly so don't expect that 75% market share (which is solely based on retail sales not actual ownership) to stand this quarter and next (not sure if enough time in 2nd so definitely 3rd and 4th).
Unless someone has personal grudge with nVidia, why would someone go for Fury over 980Ti, where the later yields better performance, with less power consumption at the same price?
Unless someone has personal grudge with nVidia, why would someone go for Fury over 980Ti, where the later yields better performance, with less power consumption at the same price?
Well. I can ofcourse only speak for my self, I bought the card because it's fucking COOL....small (195mm) with a efficient water cooler on it. What's there not to like? It performs great running VSR 4K on my 1080p monitor with the games I play. There is nothing disappointing with this card even if it doesn't beat the 980Ti across the board. I think AMD deserves my money and I don't give a shit about their marketing dep. AMD is pushing gaming forward and that in my book is worth rewarding.
Well there you go. Same could be said for any product. Why buy a Taurus over a mustang?
Do Tauruses and Mustangs cost exactly the same these days?
Taurus is more
Do Tauruses and Mustangs cost exactly the same these days?
Wow. I know the new Tarus is supposed to be a much nicer car than the older ones but damn.
Well. I can ofcourse only speak for my self, I bought the card because it's fucking COOL....small (195mm) with a efficient water cooler on it. What's there not to like? It performs great running VSR 4K on my 1080p monitor with the games I play. There is nothing disappointing with this card even if it doesn't beat the 980Ti across the board. I think AMD deserves my money and I don't give a shit about their marketing dep. AMD is pushing gaming forward and that in my book is worth rewarding.
This I think sums up Amd fans here. It's part pity part cool factor. Rational individuals would buy the more performant Nvidia card but the intangible is how much cool factor overrides performance by the factory all in one cooler.
There are a couple of very valid points there (the water cooling and the resolution he games at), and a couple that are far more objective (advancing gaming) although also arguable.
My big issue is that at the same price point, one is clearly faster. If the Fury was even $50 cheaper, then the discussion becomes much more difficult and is based on your gaming setup, monitor types, long term plans, etc. As it is, the 980Ti is demonstrably faster, and costs the same. Now, I may end up buying a Fury myself at some point - my secondary system is slightly long-in-the-tooth from the video perspective (6870), but given that I'm generally only playing UT3/UT2k4 and some lighter games on it, and only occasionally, I'm not sure it's even remotely worth doing - it's primarily a workstation.
People under estimate the cost of water cooling. If you take the closed loop cooler off of it, they could drop prices. To me the Fury X is the perfect Small form factor card. Will fit in just about any case, will not have heat build up problems because the hot air gets exhaust out of the case from the radiator.
It may not beat the 980ti in performance right now, but it doesn't need to. It's smaller, whisper quiet, performs nearly the same, and looks pretty cool to boot. Full picture is yet to be seen with driver improvements, Windows 10, Direct X 12, voltage overclocking, and memory overclocking etc. Not that these will likely change the picture much, but they do yet remain to been seen.
Well that was my point with the car analogy, although wasn't expecting it to be discussed further, lol. Being the same price it seems most are only allowing one metric for purchasing and that is performance. But there are a vast array of metrics available, and some already mentioned, where the Fury is the better choice.
With any purchase, you can not hold another to the same criteria as yourself, hence the sales of the Fury at the confusion of others. The size of the card alone will sale it being the difference in size is greater than difference in performance.
Actually we should add that metric, performance per square area.
Well that was my point with the car analogy, although wasn't expecting it to be discussed further, lol. Being the same price it seems most are only allowing one metric for purchasing and that is performance. But there are a vast array of metrics available, and some already mentioned, where the Fury is the better choice.
With any purchase, you can not hold another to the same criteria as yourself, hence the sales of the Fury at the confusion of others. The size of the card alone will sale it being the difference in size is greater than difference in performance.
Actually we should add that metric, performance per square area.
While the card itself is shorter the long tubes and the rad + fan itself also take up space that might not always be easy to find in extremely small cases where a shorter card is required.
Where can we get the vram benchmark utility from? Googling oclmembench.exe only returns 3 results none appearing like a download link or appearing to be very reputable.
there ya go.. https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B9OoHSmkeSeNNEE3ZkpsSWlnZ1k/view
Personally I have troubles running it.. the 64bit just instacrash, and the 32bit show weird and inconsistent results..
People freak out about Nvidia even being slightly misleading but AMD can flat out lie and get away with it. You can not trust anything they say and only reputable review sites will be the place for the truth.
People freak out about Nvidia even being slightly misleading but AMD can flat out lie and get away with it. You can not trust anything they say and only reputable review sites will be the place for the truth.
Its funny though. He doesn't mention the time frame at which this is possible. Watch politics and you get the grasp of how to speak and not lie but not really telling the truth either. I always preach, DONT LOOK AT WHAT THEY SAY BUT WHAT THEY DIDNT. DX12 with both AMD and Nvidia is a good example of this, each speaking to what they can do in DX12 but alluding to the other not without saying they aren't or speaking to what they lack in DX12.
Here there is a lot of facts to the card components that say there is the possibility of extreme OCing possibility. AMD reference cards tend to have sound components for high OCing potential. Problem for now is there is no voltage control and Memory OCing (which for the moment looks to have some performance increase impact) is not supported. Yet may be the word of the day. But if within the next month or two OCing is not opened up, although I am sure Unwinder (I think I have that right, the guy with Afterburner) will get something done, then for sure he lied his rearend off.
And if he lied, then well he lied. But I don't think this is quite the same, although to no less a degree to the consumer, as the 970 memory issue. I think, and this is just my opinion, Nvidia kept the memory segmentation secret to sell against the 4Gb 290/290X knowing again that a consumer will generally buy the higher number regardless of true performance potential. That memory issue created real operation issues where OCing or the lack thereof general does not.
Bah. Politcal bullshit and half-truths are blatant lying as well. I don't buy into that "well they didn't say when" shit.
This I think sums up Amd fans here. It's part pity part cool factor. Rational individuals would buy the more performant Nvidia card but the intangible is how much cool factor overrides performance by the factory all in one cooler.