This is why Fury X can't ever touch Maxwell

5150Joker said:
114080-silverstone-ft03-mini.png


Looks like full length GTX cards fit just fine in that case of yours. FreeSync is cheaper but better than G-Sync? Nope. I didn't know DX 12 games were out, got benchmarks?
Click to expand...

The Zotac 980 Ti Amp Extreme is a triple slot card, measures 12.9" in length ("standard" GTX is 10.5"), and has an oversized cooler/PCB. It'll have difficulty fitting even in some mid-towers without removing the HDD cages, let alone an mITX box.
 
Dayaks said:
The 7970 is/was a good card. WoW is an awesome game and you're right you probably don't need a 980ti/Fury X to drive it. :) I wish they would enable better AA though. Or GUI scaling. Or the ability to put it into the nVidia control panel...
Click to expand...

Wow now has options for MSAA and SSAA as well as Depth AA up to 8x.

Try to max out 4x SSAA with CMAA And 8x Depth AA. It was taxing I can tell you that :)
 
DASHlT said:
Wow now has options for MSAA and SSAA as well as Depth AA up to 8x.

Try to max out 4x SSAA with CMAA And 8x Depth AA. It was taxing I can tell you that :)
Click to expand...

World of Warships does? I'll have to check it out.

Edit: I think you thought I meant world of Warcraft. :(
 
Last edited:
PRIME1 said:
Fury X should be $499 or less and the Fury $399 or less.
Click to expand...
Not MSRP, but sale prices... I pretty much agree. That's based on the current price 980's are going for.
The 980 is almost a year old and this is what AMD considers "competition"? The community should be outraged.

The fact that the 390X is actually $30 more expensive than the Fury you just listed is what makes this so disappointing. A rebranded Hawaii chip currently occupies the spot where Fury should be. What kind of world are we living in...
 
harmattan said:
It's because they're testing with old drivers, or more likely, are re-using old results. In short, shit testing methodology.

Another example is where 295x2 is showing in their Witcher 3 result as slower than a single 290 -- this was the case the first couple weeks after release. I know from experience the 295x2 has worked exceptionally in Witcher 3 since 15.5 betas (with some flickering issues when AA is on) and runs pretty much perfectly with 15.7.
Click to expand...

Here is a quote from the review, page 2 bottom




Our suite was recently refreshed with standardised quality settings across all resolutions and the addition of two new titles: Grand Theft Auto V and The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt. All comparison cards were tested from the ground-up on up-to-date drivers and, due to popular demand, we've also added a couple of older graphics cards so you can easily see how today's cards compare with those of yesteryear.
 
wantapple said:
because fury is tiny
fits nice on my itx case
is going to be better at DX12
and freesync monitors are cheaper and better.
Click to expand...

Well you got the freesync being cheaper part right anyway. Fury might be smaller but a 980Ti will fit in most itx cases
 
wantapple said:
because fury is tiny
fits nice on my itx case
is going to be better at DX12
and freesync monitors are cheaper and better.
Click to expand...
Lol so you are predicting the future with your claim of it being faster in DX12? So lets say it magically gets 15-20% faster in DX12 than Nvidia and ends up only matching the oced 980 Ti in some cases then at 4k where neither will still be very playable in demanding games. You will celebrate that in a year or so with the two or three DX12 games that may be out? :rolleyes:

And freesync is better than gsync? lol ok...
 
Last edited:
misterbobby said:
Lol so you are predicting the future with your claim of it being faster in DX12? So lets say it magically gets 15-20% faster in DX12 than Nvidia and ends up only matching the oced 980 Ti in some cases then at 4k where neither will still be very playable in demanding games. You will celebrate that in a year or so with the two or three DX12 games that may be out? :rolleyes:

And freesync is better than gsync? lol ok...
Click to expand...

The only nvidia gpu that fits in my case is the 970 mini or Fury X lol.
 
5150Joker said:
I don't recall AMD fans ever complaining about the 7970 GHz edition when it was just an OC as well? This thing is factory set and warrantied for 5 years and still has plenty of OC headroom unlike the Failure X. The best part of this all? It runs just as cool and quiet as Fury X but does it without the clunky H20 setup.
Click to expand...

I'm just stating that I'm not surprised it's faster, that's all.

Your title says "can't ever touch Maxwell". I guess we'll see, but taking recent history into account there's nothing to back that up. The last 2 gens nVidia has been faster at release, but it hasn't ended up that way.
 
filip said:
Boy these guys are still driving the point home that AMD sucks. :rolleyes:
We know what the performance is, actually we have known since the launch of the fury x. Despite the numbers people have made their choices, don't know why this needs to be drilled in one more time.
Click to expand...

You never stop advertising a product until you stop selling it.
 
Gideon said:
Now just put up a chart on crossfire Fury X and SLI 980ti. Oh wait you probably don't want to put those up since crossfire scales much better and the card does not choke at higher resolution despite having only 4gb of memory on each card. To me is doesn't matter cause both cards are way overpriced, like I need all that power to play console ports these days. I will just stay with my two 290x cards for now, since both companies have underwhelmed me this round, it's not like I have needed more graphic power anyway.
Click to expand...

Ain't that the truth. Pretty bad when $650 is supposed to be value because people are dumb enough to buy $1000 graphics cards to play broken games on.
 
Relayer said:
O/C card beats reference. Who would've known? :D
Click to expand...

Fiji cards are so far all maxed out from the factory just to be able to keep up, so the "reference" excuse is a little flimsy, sorry.

That's why in the end it comes down to performance per dollar, with strong consideration given in enthusiast circles like [H] for OC headroom. Fury/FuryX has none - this is evidenced by even AMD's board partners not being able to place even a small factory OC on their enthusiast/performance lines that normally get them (ASUS Strix version of Fury = no OC. ASUS Strix version of any Nvidia card = always a moderate OC).
 
Last edited:
from the title of your thread, you said "this is why", but you didn't give any reasons why maxwell is faster than fury, you just showed that it is.

Worthless thread. Everybody knows it's faster (or at least they should).
-1 for thread because you didn't add any content or discussion for the "why", you just posted links to other sites' test results.
 
Thread title is, "This is why Fury X will never touch Maxwell." And to prove it, OP posts a bunch of benchmarks that show the Fury X neck and neck with a 980 Ti and even the Titan X in a couple? Maybe that phrase doesnt mean what I think it means because aside from the cards that are highly overclocked, I see the Fury X "touching" Maxwell a couple times there.

Yeah the 980 Ti is a better card especially with the Fury X being priced $50 too high for some reason Ill never understand. But I think this thread is a little over the top.
 
MacLeod said:
Thread title is, "This is why Fury X will never touch Maxwell." And to prove it, OP posts a bunch of benchmarks that show the Fury X neck and neck with a 980 Ti and even the Titan X in a couple? Maybe that phrase doesnt mean what I think it means because aside from the cards that are highly overclocked, I see the Fury X "touching" Maxwell a couple times there.

Yeah the 980 Ti is a better card especially with the Fury X being priced $50 too high for some reason Ill never understand. But I think this thread is a little over the top.
Click to expand...

Nvidia fans in particular take special delight in sh*tting on amd, nothing new to see here. It's not enough to simply buy their nvidia cards and be happy, they feel impelled to try and convince others that nvidia is the only thing worthy of anyones money.
 
Man this thread sucks. OP ditch the sad emotional attachment to a video card company ffs. You've been here 10 years so you can't be 14 years old anymore.
 
WOW, a heavily overclocked video card with a heavy boost number is beating the Fury X, color me surprised.

What thread are you going to make next, that the Zotac model beats a stock 980ti? Whooptie fucking do.
 
Igroock said:
WOW, a heavily overclocked video card with a heavy boost number is beating the Fury X, color me surprised.

What thread are you going to make next, that the Zotac model beats a stock 980ti? Whooptie fucking do.
Click to expand...

Now imagine if the 980ti was watercooled had HBM and used as much power as Fury X. It would probably be 50% faster instead of just 20% faster.
 
PRIME1 said:
Now imagine if the 980ti was watercooled had HBM and used as much power as Fury X. It would probably be 50% faster instead of just 20% faster.
Click to expand...

it isn't 20% faster dude, stock vs stock both are neck to neck. if you are talking about ocd gpus yes it is depending in the resolution.
 
AllBlackFan said:
Man this thread sucks. OP ditch the sad emotional attachment to a video card company ffs. You've been here 10 years so you can't be 14 years old anymore.
Click to expand...

Quoted for Truth.

Once I saw the thread title I knew it was from either 5150Joker, Prime1 or Spayinmango.
 
Why would anyone touch a Titan, holy shit those things are so overpriced underperforming cards!
 
This is just 5150Joker being himself. He can't enjoy his Titan X SLI setup unless he knows that AMD fans everywhere are miserable with their purchases.
 
trandoanhung1991 said:
AMD won't be better than DX12. In fact, from what I heard, it's NVIDIA who will be better.

FreeSync is cheaper, yes, but not better AFAIK. GSync overall seems better because it has quality attached to it, unlike FreeSync where AMD promises the moon and then give you 40-60Hz VSR window monitors ;)
Click to expand...

where did you see that? All I see are devs praising and demoing everything on GCN. Maxwel doesn't even do asynchronous compute right and GCN pretty much d estroys that feature. Gives up to 40% performance so these overclocked 980tis might be good for the garbage soon
 
DracoNB said:
Why would anyone touch a Titan, holy shit those things are so overpriced underperforming cards!
Click to expand...

Or Fury/Fury X. Overpriced, under performing, feature lacking, memory starved, etc, etc. I wonder if we will look back and call it "The card that killed AMD".

I'm sure we can all agree that Zotac has put out an epic card. 20% or so faster than the Fury X is a good thing at least for us true PC enthusiasts who crave performance. :cool:
 
wantapple said:
because fury is tiny
fits nice on my itx case
is going to be better at DX12
and freesync monitors are cheaper and better.
Click to expand...
I have a Mini-ITX build with a Titan X in it. In fact there is no room for the Fury-X cooler in my case at all. (And my case is a slightly bigger version of yours.)

FreeSync is cheaper, but there are countless issues with it that pop up.

There have been zero DX12 benchmarks to show which video card will be better at DX12, and it has been nothing but butthurt speculation so far. So let us wait for real numbers.
 
Banko said:
I have a Mini-ITX build with a Titan X in it. In fact there is no room for the Fury-X cooler in my case at all. (And my case is a slightly bigger version of yours.)

FreeSync is cheaper, but there are countless issues with it that pop up.

There have been zero DX12 benchmarks to show which video card will be better at DX12, and it has been nothing but butthurt speculation so far. So let us wait for real numbers.
Click to expand...

I believe he said Fury, not fury-x.

Countless Freesync issues?? News to me, can you list 10 please?

I agree with the last bit, no way to tell yet how DX12 will perform.
 
PRIME1 said:
Or Fury/Fury X. Overpriced, under performing, feature lacking, memory starved, etc, etc. I wonder if we will look back and call it "The card that killed AMD".

I'm sure we can all agree that Zotac has put out an epic card. 20% or so faster than the Fury X is a good thing at least for us true PC enthusiasts who crave performance. :cool:
Click to expand...

tjAh0lU.png


$50 more, more power, more heat, more noise.

Not seeing those as plusses in my book, but you seem to prefer the MORE = better.
 
PRIME1 said:
Now imagine if the 980ti was watercooled had HBM and used as much power as Fury X. It would probably be 50% faster instead of just 20% faster.
Click to expand...

I am not gonna imagine anything. A stock for stock comparison of a Fury to a 980TI is almost close, with the TI pulling ahead depending on the situation.

These are HEAVILY overclocked cards that even beat a stock 980ti because stock is well...stock, not overclocked. You see a pattern here?

If you want to be imaginative then a watercooled 980ti would cost you exactly what the hybrid model costs now at $750, plus the HBM cost. Its not the same.
 
DracoNB said:
$50 more, more power, more heat, more noise.

Not seeing those as plusses in my book, but you seem to prefer the MORE = better.
Click to expand...

I love how you use a picture without the giant radiator/reservoir :D

Good luck running that card without water :eek:
 
Igroock said:
I am not gonna imagine anything. A stock for stock comparison of a Fury to a 980TI is almost close, with the TI pulling ahead depending on the situation.

These are HEAVILY overclocked cards that even beat a stock 980ti because stock is well...stock, not overclocked. You see a pattern here?

If you want to be imaginative then a watercooled 980ti would cost you exactly what the hybrid model costs now at $750, plus the HBM cost. Its not the same.
Click to expand...

I don't really see a problem. You shouldn't either save for the fact that Fury is a shit overclocker. Only reason there aren't more OC to OC comparisons is because there's close to zero gains on Fury.
 
RamonGTP said:
I don't really see a problem. You shouldn't either save for the fact that Fury is a shit overclocker. Only reason there aren't more OC to OC comparisons is because there's close to zero gains on Fury.
Click to expand...

It is what it is. Its an early stage of HBM tech so they have to start somewhere. Majority of you dont look at Fury objectively, but rather expect a rocket engine of a card that will blast off into space.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top