quick. 980 (non ti) or fury (non x)?

A

AndreRio

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Nov 23, 2011
Messages
1,240
if it was you...would you get a 980 or a fury video card?

and what 980/fury would you recommend?
 
Sincerely I would pick a Fury non X. however it also depend on the resolution you will be playing. at 2560x1440 or less GTX 980 it's the way to go. if 4K then Fury.
 
GTX 980, we already know a lot about it's potential, the Fury would still be a gamble.

And you can even find the 980 at a good price, new or used.
 
980 for anything less than 4K.
Although you'd have to be crazy to buy a 980 or Fury for 4K.
 
Two GTX 980's give more weightage towards 4k, even more than VRam compared to the ti.

You'll see that you'll get higher benches, frames with the SLi 980's, even though it may suffer from VRam compared to the ti, which has 2GB more.
 
why people love to go off topic every time?. this isn't about 980 SLI just 980 or fury. That's all and its easy. 2560x1440 or less = GTX 980. 4K = Fury.
 
He is using a "HP ZR2740W" which is a 1440p monitor.

A GTX 980 will most likely be cheaper at this time considering the low stock that has been happening to the Fury Line and how long the 980 has been out (8+ months). You can even buy a 980 Kingpin card from EVGA.com for only $500 brand new with a insane stock core speed. Used 980's will probably be around $400-$430 price, but $500 for a custom card like the Kingpin isn't bad.

The Fury does have that new HBM which wouldn't be an issue to try out unless you don't like being an early adopter as they call it. You would pay slightly more for the card, but if you want something new and don't need HDMI 2.0 in the future the Fury isn't so bad.

Also consider the other technologies that accompany these cards. With a single card GPU drivers shouldn't be much of an issue. They both have some type of super sampling tech (though I rarely use DSR as I don't like the quality of it, maybe it's just something on this Swift) while AMD has VSR.

The Fury I believe does have a bios switch which is pretty awesome in my book. Downside is unless they unlock the voltage for the GPU cores it's sort of useless to have dual bios on there without the ability to increase voltage while being under warranty.

At the end of the day either card would be nice to own. I prefer Nvidia but if I didn't have a GSYNC monitor I would give AMD a try. Flip a coin and let fate decide.
 
980 for anything under 4k. 4K is still out of reach for current gen cards.
 
yeah u right I am at 1440p gaming. u guys think I should get a fury then since it is more powerful than the 980?
 
AndreRio said:
yeah u right I am at 1440p gaming. u guys think I should get a fury then since it is more powerful than the 980?
Click to expand...

it's more powerful at 4K.. you are playing at 1440P then GTX 980 its the way to go.. if you want to keep the card for a long time.. then I'll be probably still pick the Fury over GTX 980. as it will probably happen the same as HD7970 and 290X and being able to be a larger period of relevance..
 
You have a 290x now? A 980 is not exactly a big jump at 1440 by any means as there is only about a 15% difference.

A 980 Ti can be had for just 150 bucks more than a 980 and will provide a much better experience at 1440 and an actual worthwhile upgrade to the 290x.
 
misterbobby said:
You have a 290x now? A 980 is not exactly a big jump at 1440 by any means as there is only about a 15% difference.

A 980 Ti can be had for just 150 bucks more than a 980 and will provide a much better experience at 1440 and an actual worthwhile upgrade to the 290x.
Click to expand...

this. there's no point in going to the 980 or Fury from a 290X at 1440p. 980 Ti is the only option
 
misterbobby said:
You have a 290x now? A 980 is not exactly a big jump at 1440 by any means as there is only about a 15% difference.

A 980 Ti can be had for just 150 bucks more than a 980 and will provide a much better experience at 1440 and an actual worthwhile upgrade to the 290x.
Click to expand...

no. I gave it to my sister. I am using onboard. and I cant afford a x or ti!
 
Fury. It's faster than the 980. The 390X trades blows with the 980 in non Gameworks games.

O/C'ing changes things, but unwinder is working on fixing AB to work with Fury.
 
I use my 980 @ 4k all day long without issue. Love how people recommend the Fury for 4k when it doesn't even have HDMI 2.0. Sure DP is more than capable, but not everything has DP.
 
Relayer said:
Fury. It's faster than the 980. The 390X trades blows with the 980 in non Gameworks games.

O/C'ing changes things, but unwinder is working on fixing AB to work with Fury.
Click to expand...
And at 550 bucks its insane not to spend another 100 bucks for a 980 Ti. OC both cards and 980 Ti is 30-35% faster than the Fury at 1440.
 
Skillz said:
I use my 980 @ 4k all day long without issue. Love how people recommend the Fury for 4k when it doesn't even have HDMI 2.0. Sure DP is more than capable, but not everything has DP.
Click to expand...

There are more and more good DP choices, also with freesync, now even with no PWM flicker found on many of the TVs.
Let alone the fact that HDMI2 on Nvidia implementation, can't do 10bit at 4k60fps 4:4:4. This means no ultra wide gamut colour support for upcoming media. It's not a real 4k solution. Just a band aid until new chips are integrated in next generation of cards.

DP on other hand can do that no problem right now.
 
Skillz said:
I use my 980 @ 4k all day long without issue. Love how people recommend the Fury for 4k when it doesn't even have HDMI 2.0. Sure DP is more than capable, but not everything has DP.
Click to expand...

All monitors that have HDMI 2.0 also have DP. For the 4K TV crowd who have HDMI 2.0 they shouldn't use Fury. Everyone else is fine and performance is better.
 
A lot of people use 32" - 40" 4k tv's as monitors.
 
Skillz said:
A lot of people use 32" - 40" 4k tv's as monitors.
Click to expand...

I guess you would have to define "a lot". HDMI 2.0 is pretty new for a lot of people to need it. Either way, if you only have HDMI 2.0 for 4K@60Hz usage then it's pretty obvious what to use. If you have an actual 4K monitor then DP is available and much more common.

It's just an interesting side note, that while G-sync monitors don't offer HDMI 2.0 Freesync monitors do.
 
Most people who use 4k on their PC prefer the larger size a TV offers over a less than 30" monitor. Because 4k makes everything so much smaller and not all operating systems scale that great.

There's an entire thread devoted to TVs that make good monitors for this reason.
 
Skillz said:
Most people who use 4k on their PC prefer the larger size a TV offers over a less than 30" monitor. Because 4k makes everything so much smaller and not all operating systems scale that great.

There's an entire thread devoted to TVs that make good monitors for this reason.
Click to expand...

I missed the survey you saw with what most people own, I guess. ;)

Either way, it's a non factor when asking. If you own a 4K TV with only HDMI 2.0 input, you have to use nVidia. No one would ever recommend anything else. For everyone else there is a choice and that's when Fury, Grenada get recommended.

There are 32 4K monitors listed on PC partpicker (US). They don't even offer a search by HDMI 2.0 yet (I wonder why?). When you search by DP though they still list 31. I really think you are making a mountain out of a molehill with the HDMI 2.0 caveat.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top