3DMark Firemark Scores Radeon Fury X surfaces - but are they real ?

I'm glad your happy with your purchase, I think the 290x is a good card, especially at higher resolutions. That being said, the 970 outperforms the 290x in nearly every new title @ FHD/QHD. It does it at nearly half the power 290w vs. 145w, and as you said that lower power leads to lower temps. Plus then you get all the Nvidia marquee features, which are just more checkboxes to add to the 970.

I mean yeah the 290x already competes with the 970, but it isn't very good at it.

 

Don't know about you, but I do care about temps and their consequence, noise.
I remember GTX480 fiasco running close to 100C and nVidia's statement that no one should be concerned for it was prepared to run that hot.
The problem was that the rest of the system (CPU, memory etc.) was not and getting rid of this amount of heat makes your computer sound like a vacuum cleaner.

 

Let's just hope Fury can get a bit of competition on the go again.

 

970 is better at all front, it can oc higher easily and still drain less power than 290X.

I saw 290x in action , i've seen mine highly oced 780 and my friend 970, nvidia performed way way better than 290x, even when all of them oced.

Offtopic i hate what nvidia did to kepler and i hope it won't repeat.

 

I hope that they are real because it is pretty impressive that a rebranded r9 290 (390) is beating out a 970 plus 2 fury Xs are faster than 2 Titian X's and just 1 of those cards are faster than the 980 ti and on par with the 1 Titan X which is very impressive.

 

Maybe invest in some watercooling ?
You could ad an AIO to the GPU(s) or CPU, or both, and have a very quiet powerful system.
If you're more inclined, you could make your own watercooling loop.
It might be relatively expensive, but over time, its worth it.
Its only awkward if you have to swap out cards for some reason.

 

One other thing thats just crossed my mind, is that the Fiji PCB should be very simple, and much cheaper to produce, than all the other current cards out there.
No memory traces to put in at all, just display outputs and power stages.

Shouldn't that give a margin for pricing ?

 

Really? Then what explains this?

Spoiler

 

Rumor has been the HBM is expensive to make due to low yields, which was going to mean a spendy card - some rumors said $800 compared to the $650 for the 980 Ti. We'll see how that plays out on Tuesday, unless it's all leaked this weekend.

If it sits between the Titan X and 980 Ti in game bench marks, and they can get it out for $550, they'll have a compelling card on their hands. If it's at punching weight all around, they'll only be selling them to the existing AMD fans which isn't enough.

 

Um your link does not work so you need to try something else to argue your point.

 

You nailed it. 970 is superior to the 290/290x because of the package. I was just pointing out that 970 wasn't a great success because of it's price/performance ratio. Because that's not the reason at all. 290x for £50 less performs just the same.

The thing is, I would rather pay £50 more for the 970, even if I get same performance. It's the other stuff that I took into consideration that made the 970 a better choice for me. Inspector is a massive factor for me, I've said this before, but AMD really need to come up with something similar to Inspector. Yes, you can set profiles from the CCC but Inspector is miles ahead, when it comes to tweakability and compatibility.

Also, DSR, not saying downsampling is impossible on AMD, but it's just so convenient on nVidia. Installed Heroes of Might and Magic V today, first thing I did was set the resolution to 4k. Took 1 click of the mouse.

Then there's ShadowPlay, while the majority might not use it, I do. Then there's the low power draw, low heat, no noise and amazing overclocking.

I can run my 970 at 1500/7800 24/7 and the card sits around 65C even in the most demanding games and it's noiseless. After a 10 hour session of TW3, the highest my 970 went was 66C. That's at 1500/7800. That itself is incredible.

I was just pointing out that the 970 isn't popular because it performs better for your money. 290x for less money will perform just as good, if not slightly better, no matter what Cyberdyne thinks. It's just that everything else around the 970 is a lot more appealing to me and many others.

I can't really explain something hidden behind a censored link, sorry.

 

1st gen. HBM is already produced fine. If it had trouble with 4 slices, then nVidia could only dream about getting 2nd generation of HBM which will require 8 layers at 1st to get that double capacity.

It is interposer which is too hard to make at this time. But question is how old news that is now, there could have been breakthrough months ago and we would not know.

 

Fixed. Here is the link I was shooting for.

I just don't see how someone can say AMD has been competitive against the 970 when their market share has fallen off a cliff to record lows since it came out.

 

AMD came out with "Virtual Super Resolution" a few months back. It's basically the exact same thing as DSR on paper. I don't have an AMD card, so I don't know if it works as easy as it does on Nvidia.

 

nobody is trying to tell you that AMD are doing well when it comes to market share or profit. What I'm saying is that AMD have solid alternatives in the mid/high end market and they always have. People not buying AMD cards is a different matter.

Fact remains that if I was upgrading now, I could pick up a 290x for £50 less than a 970 and enjoy the same performance. I don't understand how that's not competitive.

 

The interposer isn't that complex, it just very large.
Basically, they have to make it as big as is possible on the fab lithography process.
Its a bit like making a chip, but with only traces and no transistors.
It should be a well run in process by now.

What i see with Fiji, is that the Huge GPU only just fits onto the interposer vertically. Any larger GPU wouldn't have fit.

 

Yes, it does.
Once the correct checkbox has been selected, I can select any scaled resolution upwards.
When i tested it, it made everything smaller though, like it was on a higher res monitor.
I have 1080p, and I tried 1440p.
Not sure if thats what DSR does on Nvidia.

edit - just checked again, and its in the menus that the text is smaller, in the game its all the right size, just a lot sharper, and a drop in fps obviously.
Open windows on the desktop are rearranged when coming back out of the game, as if the resolution had been changed also at some point.

 

Interposer has to be drilled through to deliver power to GPU and HBM.
Then there has to have 4096 internal connections between GPU and HBMs. (it is basically very dense PCB)
That is 8 times more than number of lanes going from GPU with 512 bit memory controller to gddr5 chips. And it is done in fraction of material.

If that is not exponentially more complicated then I do not know what it is.

 

Okay, this is a semantics issue. I agree with you the 290X is just as good, if not a better deal than the 970. I just recommended one of the Powercolor cards to a friend recently. What I meant was looking at how the market has reacted, not how I would spend my money personally.

Well, DSR (and the manual form of Downsampling where you just add custom resolutions through the Nvidia Control Panel) leave the desktop and all programs running at native res. What you will see is just an option in the game's menu to chose those higher resolutions. Once you select that res, the game will run at the higher resolution. Once you get close out of the game, Windows is still running at the native res.

But the important thing is they have the option now. Downsampling is a big help with 1080p monitors and TVs.

 

Even if these benchmarks are real, Firestrike has always given a relative advantage to AMD cards. In Guru3d's benchmarks, the 290X takes a healthy lead over the GTX 970 in Firestrike. Of course, there are other elements to GPU purchase decisions besides FPS and 3D Mark scores.
http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/gigabyte_geforce_gtx_980_ti_g1_gaming_soc_review,24.html