![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
This is why Fury X can't ever touch Maxwell
- Thread starter 5150Joker
- Start date
It's amazing that it's even beating the 295x2. 1 chip > 2.
This shows the reference 980ti losing to the Fury X and almost tieing a Titan X. Of course a high overclocked card will kill a card at stock clocks. Who would have known?
MrCaffeineX
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Aug 22, 2011
- Messages
- 1,604
This shows the reference 980ti losing to the Fury X and almost tieing a Titan X. Of course a high overclocked card will kill a card at stock clocks. Who would have known?
But that 4GB of HBM is holding it back and making it worthless
This shows the reference 980ti losing to the Fury X and almost tieing a Titan X. Of course a high overclocked card will kill a card at stock clocks. Who would have known?
It's a retail card, not a user overclock.
Anyone could buy one of these and not have to modify it to get these numbers.
The 980ti is looking like the best chip released since the 8800GTX
So thats why the stock Fury X is faster than the stock 980 TI for the same price, while also taking less room and running cooler / quieter?
Thats comparing retail to retail at same price right?
Or do you want to compare $50 more expensive card to a $50 less expensive one because those are the retail specs?
Oh yeah, and that $50 more expensive one takes 3 PCI slots with its monster cooler to match the same cooling as the watercooler on the $50 cheaper card.
Depends on the game, 60% of the games, a stock 980 Ti stomps a FuryX. Mildly overclocked 980 Ti, beats the crap out of an overclocked FuryX.
I would say that FuryX tried hard and fell short. HBM is not ready for prime time yet. I would have expected a chip with 25% more pixel throughput and 30% more bandwidth to walk over the competition. But Alas the FuryX fails to do so. It barely keeps up with a reference 980 Ti, all this while needing a 120mm radiator to be mounted on your case.
Source? Look at all of the charts in the OP, its with in a few FPS (sometimes more, sometimes less) in every game.
You can't overclock the Fury X because there isn't software to let you, so please show me all of these overclocked Fury X reviews, or stop spreading FUD.
Funny, I see the Fury Tri-X (thats the Air version for $100 less FYI) sticking close to the 980 TI in all of those charts as well... so there goes that theory.
Also you do realize that the cooler on the Fury X means its a much smaller card and also much quieter and low temp than the 980 TI right? Thats why EVGA is making a WC'd 980 TI, or is that bad because it will also require a radiator?
Dunno if you saw this OC3D news, but someone was somehow able to overvolt the Fury X, and got it to 1215 MHz although it wasn't entirely stable.
So with voltage unlocked, I'm guessing the ceiling will be around 1200 MHz unless you have a golden sample, so pretty much in line with what we saw with Hawaii. Better than what Fury X can do now, but still not a game changer (although it'll help to close the gap a bit).
So with voltage unlocked, I'm guessing the ceiling will be around 1200 MHz unless you have a golden sample, so pretty much in line with what we saw with Hawaii. Better than what Fury X can do now, but still not a game changer (although it'll help to close the gap a bit).
Do you REALLY believe its a mere software issue standing in the way of Fiji overclocking? That if Unwinder manages to unlock voltage control, suddenly the beast will be unchained? If there was any OC margin there, AMD would have had VC unlocked on day one for the reviews. The silence tells you everything.
Sooner or later you'll have to face it, Fiji cards are maxed out at the factory just to be able to keep up. When AMD's AIB board partners can't even manage a factory overclock on their enthusiast lines like ASUS Strix - a line known coming with a decent factory overclock - just maybe there's a reason.
Last edited:
Well someone got over a 15% OC when they (apparently) managed to unlock voltage, so yes, I do think it will matter.
Also what about all my other points you seem to gloss over?
Also that Card you are talking about, the Strix Fury? They got a 10% OC w/o voltage changing here:
http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/asus_radeon_r9_fury_strix_review,36.html
Which gave over 10% perf game in hitman @ 2560x1600, 6% in Bioshock, 10% in Tomb raider and ~9% in 3d mark.
So yes, I think it will matter.
Doesn't matter, you don't compare factory overclocked cards to reference cards for an Apples to apples comparison. 980ti is a great card, yeah I get it and I do own one, but you make it seem like AMD is complete trash which is not even remotely true. Different strokes for different folks.
Take a look at a large pool of websites including [H] before drawing you conclusions.
Statistically never pick a single result. Just go through [H], Anandtech, Techreport and PCPer and my claims regarding the reference Ti being 5-10% faster than a single FuryX will hold true.
I don't have a desktop PC anymore as I parted it out. Its a shame to see AMD falling short here again. It's not good for consumers in the long run. AMD probably doesn't have much left. I wonder how long it will be until their graphics cards go the way of their CPUs with everyone just avoiding them due to the poor performance.
N4CR
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Oct 17, 2011
- Messages
- 4,947
This is not the first time that this has occurred with AMD cards and voltage control. Just takes time for the enthusiasts to figure it out, especially how to maximise the OC. E.g. with 7970 it took a month or two from launch, until it was totally figured out and with easily available information. Bios ended up being a decent part of it.
Not to mention driver improvements. This Fury approach is rather different, I would be not surprised to see decent gains with further driver R&D, especially in CFX but I do not bank on unknowns. It's just icing on the cake.
I find the total AMD hate quite hilarious. And that's coming from someone who was almost certain to drop on a pair of 980Ti, until the CFX Fury X results started coming out...
Last edited:
I feel some people read fanboy comments instead of looking at the actual numbers. Fury is actually not a poor performer, it's just a little slower than a 980Ti when talking about single card solutions and beats it when comparing CF to SLI and continues to extend that lead when adding a 3rd card.
Problem for AMD is most people will look at single card performance, and for good reason and when looking at single card performance, being slightly slower while costing just as much is a recipe for disaster, particularly when you're the underdog. Yes I understand that HBM and the AIO cooler add manufacturing costs but those are secondary and tertiary concerns to most people because most people buying a flagship card are looking at performance and how much that performance costs.
If the card cost $550 instead of $650 it would be praised, even though its performance remains unchanged. Then there's the issue of drivers and sub par support for a lot of new releases that has been brought to the forefront of debates as of late, which isn't helping them any.
So while AMD has a laundry list of issues to work on, "poor performance" is oversimplifying the issues. In fact, raw performance of the card is actually the least of their problems.
So under 900 NZD delivered for a 980Ti? From ebay? That's a damn bargain... did you get stung for tax too?
If you remember the store you mention, please let me know or PM, be very interested to check this out and for when back in NZ.
Just looked on ricespy, 980ti prices are ridiculous.. that's like launch gouging on most AMD flagships, but months later... Fury X launch money. That's getting preposterous. But suckers will be paying that, I guess a vast majority of people are running 1600p or less in NZ so the Ti is a better choice, hence pricing.. in fact most people I know run 1080p full stop.
But for me a PC is productivity and gaming so it makes sense to splash out, pays for itself very quickly.
What you got your Ti for is where I typically jump, 950-850 region, ref models to avoid binning etc.
That said I usually get almost everything from CL, I enjoy the local support and a store that speaks fluent english... Have put over 30k through them via family, friends, business over the years so they do a good deal for me personally. Just not launch GPUs.. they never do good pricing on that. Maybe one day
One thing I found funny was the 5820s were $50 cheaper in NZ at CL, than in EU! Wtf!
The 980ti i bpught was from BHPhoto in New York actually sorry, that was 669 (now 679) woth 20 delivery in US dollars which converted to 889 at the time. I will have a look and get back to you though. Wouldnt suprise me if they had it for 950 or so.
AllBlackFan
Weaksauce
- Joined
- Sep 16, 2011
- Messages
- 89
980ti is a great card agreed, the best out there currently. That said your desperation to praise Nvidia at all costs has affected your judgment. These current cards are all stopgaps created by the inability to deliver a viable 20nm process and will be superseded quickly (If TSMC can deliver on 16nm FF). No way, in my opinion, will GM200 be as long lasting or historic as G80/G92 not even close.
dragonageinquisition
Gawd
- Joined
- Jan 2, 2014
- Messages
- 601
Thing is Freesync pretty much invalidates any advantage the GTX 980Ti has over the Fury X. There is a boatload of 4K Freesync displays coming out in 2015. High end gsync displays on the other hand, completely nonexistent. Simple economics. Display makers know you'd rather spend $600 on a premium display than $1000 on a premium display with the same specs.
So the 20% performance you leave the table is irrelevant since you need 33% less performance to sync up with a 60Hz monitor.
So the 20% performance you leave the table is irrelevant since you need 33% less performance to sync up with a 60Hz monitor.
I'm one of the few people that have actually read multiple results, and guess what, Fury / Fury X are VERY close to 980 TI in all tests (minus project cars because well.. thats so broken on AMD hardware)
You said that stock 980 TI "stomps" Fury X. You have to provide proof of that because in the 10 or so sites I've read, they trade punches in most games. Ironically Fury does much, much better in Crossfire even though its "limited" by 4GB of ram vs SLI'd Titans / 980 TIs with 12/6GB of ram.
misterbobby
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Mar 18, 2014
- Messages
- 3,814
Lol trading blows would mean they are even. Out of the box the 980 Ti is already about 10% faster at 1440 than Fury X and oc both cards(which what nearly everyone will do) and its no contest. SLI/Crossfire means nothing to well over 90% that will buy one of these cards.
If you like a FuryX go ahead and buy it and remain happy. No need to have insecurity issues. At least the 980 Ti owners know they are more future proof, have 25% more performance right now and don't have to deal with two radiators!
On top of that, better drivers
AllBlackFan
Weaksauce
- Joined
- Sep 16, 2011
- Messages
- 89
If you like a FuryX go ahead and buy it and remain happy. No need to have insecurity issues. At least the 980 Ti owners know they are more future proof, have 25% more performance right now and don't have to deal with two radiators!
On top of that, better drivers
The idea when you quote someone is to respond to what you quoted, not rant about invented "insecurity" and what 980ti owners "know".
He's right though Fury X is very close to 980ti, slower but close. You tried to deflect the question of providing proof it gets "stomped" because you can't right?
I'm assuming you think "more future proof" because of VRAM, but I wouldn't be so sure looking at Tahiti vs Kepler(GK104) or Hawaii vs Kepler(GK110). If that trend continues maybe Fury is more "future proof" when Pascal hits the stores.
Edit: Also 25% more now? Need a citation for that one also. And...dealing with two radiators? Wow those two 120mm fan slots are such a hard thing to find, and the screwing in that is troublesome.
Last edited:
misterbobby
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Mar 18, 2014
- Messages
- 3,814
It is simple math. Again at 1440, the the 980 Ti has about a 10% overall lead. The Fury X cant even OC by 10% while a 980 Ti has at least another 20-30% left with many non reference cards being over 30-35% faster than reference 980 Ti when oced . So yes OC to OC, a 980 Ti is most certainly ahead by 20-30%. That is NOT close for the same price bracket.
Ha, that was a nice joke.
Try getting one of those premium freesync monitors to run 120hz plus well. For example, the rog swift is 1069 in australia, the asus mg279q is 999 and can only do feesync at 90fps max. This is relevant as most higher end gamers are at 1440p. The mg279q is a nice screen though, that said. Only advantage we can see for the price is the ips panel. I suppose your point is 4k moniotrs though, perhaps it is better at 60fps, but no thanks.
At an all-round level, i say it stomps the furyx too. More display imputs, better advantages in driver software, more features in games (well, attribute that to nvidia aggressive Gameworks marketing but still) and all round better performance. And @misterbobby, maybe i misread your above post, but i thought we couldnt oc the furyx yet, so i wonder how you could say it would be even?
misterbobby
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Mar 18, 2014
- Messages
- 3,814
Be even? Not sure what you mean. You can oc the Fury X by a little bit just not the memory.
5150Joker
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Aug 1, 2005
- Messages
- 4,568
So your entire argument for Fury X hinges on the "someday it will be fast" idea? LOL! I swear this is Deja Vu. Now NVIDIA is giving away MGS V with their 980 Ti and other cards: http://www.techpowerup.com/214548/n...in-with-select-geforce-products.html#comments So basically a $50+ game with a $650 card vs $650 Fury X that has no games and worse performance.
Last edited:
The ROG Swift is more directly comparable to the BenQ XL2730Z.
Wow! So nVidia has been pressured to sweeten the deal even further. Leave it to AMD to once again force nVidia to bring prices into line. Too bad Batman is such a broken PoS. I know the nVidia fans were really looking forward to it.
KickAssCop
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Mar 19, 2003
- Messages
- 8,333
I love how people keep showing performance games in 2 year old games that don't go past 2 GB VRAM at 4K.
980 Ti OC vs. Fury X OC in SLI/CFX configurations will show that the 980 Ti OC will always beat a Fury X OC configuration in the latest games where VRAM is at a premium like
Dying Light
Shadow of Mordor
GTA V
Witcher 3 (not sure if it is still hitting over 4 GB VRAM or they fixed it)
Farcry 4
AC Unity
If you play the latest games then 980 Ti is the only way to go. If you are still playing BioShock Infinite, Hitman Absolution or Tomb Raider, you deserve a Fury X lol.
Also love the pricing comparisons. A 980 Ti SC+ can be had for 659 on Amazon. A Fury X typically is hovering around 649-679. I got Batman game with my 980 Ti cards. Now I am getting MGS V with them. In terms of retail value I basically got 120 worth of games with each of my cards. Even if you put discounts on the games. I at least got about 50-60 worth of games. There is just no comparison to be drawn here. I know people are now buying 980 Ti at 612 bucks a pop at some stores.
980 Ti OC vs. Fury X OC in SLI/CFX configurations will show that the 980 Ti OC will always beat a Fury X OC configuration in the latest games where VRAM is at a premium like
Dying Light
Shadow of Mordor
GTA V
Witcher 3 (not sure if it is still hitting over 4 GB VRAM or they fixed it)
Farcry 4
AC Unity
If you play the latest games then 980 Ti is the only way to go. If you are still playing BioShock Infinite, Hitman Absolution or Tomb Raider, you deserve a Fury X lol.
Also love the pricing comparisons. A 980 Ti SC+ can be had for 659 on Amazon. A Fury X typically is hovering around 649-679. I got Batman game with my 980 Ti cards. Now I am getting MGS V with them. In terms of retail value I basically got 120 worth of games with each of my cards. Even if you put discounts on the games. I at least got about 50-60 worth of games. There is just no comparison to be drawn here. I know people are now buying 980 Ti at 612 bucks a pop at some stores.
They probably had to change the bundle cause, well, Batman was pulled? I thought that was obvious.
You spin me right round...
They probably won't stop the bundling since IMO it's part of their dev program. Cross marketing and all that.
limitedaccess
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- May 10, 2010
- Messages
- 7,594
The Batman bundle was scheduled to run to July 31st (or while supplies last). MGS is September 1st if anyone is wondering. The actual facts aren't that interesting
AMD fans are seemingly heart broken
Their FuryX has no Fury left. And basically according to the red team fans, big Fury will surpass big Maxwell in 2 years.
So the red team fans are going to wait and wait and wait for performance improvements.
AMD fans are seemingly heart broken
Their FuryX has no Fury left. And basically according to the red team fans, big Fury will surpass big Maxwell in 2 years.
So the red team fans are going to wait and wait and wait for performance improvements.
Certainly not waiting for more broken gameworks titles to try and make their hardware look good.