so what you are saying is that the games can use the whole bandwidth of the hbm just like that? http://*************/amd-fury-x-tested-12k-60fps/ (wccftech) (this is the first sign of what an optimised game for hbm can do actually )
Sigh... those who are jumping to the Fury X's defense, here: http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/R9_Fury_X/11.html Regardless. If you think the card is amazing, great, buy it. Enjoy. For me and many others out there, there is zero reason to buy this card over a 980 Ti, especially a G1. And yes, overclocks do matter because every site is seeing crappy overclocking potential. And today, once again, you can overclock a G1 like mad and then this whole discussion is irrelevant.
Just like Mantle, I am not going to sit around and wait for game devs to try to optimize. That has never been a sound and valid direction. Also, after testing Mantle on Dragon Age vs a 980 Ti, it's all pointless.
the card is NEW with a new type of memory socket that doesnt behave like the gddr was for years...that is enough of a reason to actually wait and see how things will perform... (also lol i love how you choose bf4 and not fc4 or crysis 3) yes indeed perhaps you can be a good guy and ask microsoft to release dx 12 and tell to every developer to implent the dx 12 api because you are in a rush :bang:
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/R9_Fury_X/15.html It gets less than 2 FPS more on 4k Crysis 3? And? With a G1, it's already faster out of the box. So..? Wait and see? Great. Let's wait and see. I'd be more interested to see if AMD even keeps making GPUs with the latest round of cards. 390x and then this? Either way, great, let's wait. As of today, I'll be enjoying a Ti.
im sorry is the g1 a refrence card? NO are you trying to justify your card by just throwing it around like a waving d*ck? totally yes its like taking a refrence 780ti and throwing a 290x tri-x and say "oh look the tri-x beats you like crazy HA HA HA" its stupid plain and simple and yes wait day one reviews/adopters never really know the full extend of a new tech you remember how 5800 and 5900 was performing after they patched out the drives to use full 3d textures? horrible because they didnt had the proper knowledge over the gddr standar yet..(actually its funny...back then the 1080p was the 4k of today..those cards where performing something like 30-40 fps at 1080p..)
The card has decent price/performance. If I was going to buy a brand new top of the line card I'd probably pick it over the GTX 980 ti solely for the potential that they can unleash more power out of the card and the memory benefits. Brand new memory, brand new card, I think there's definitely going to be performance improvements coming in the next few months. I'll agree that I am a little underwhelmed by it and it doesn't feel like a new high end GPU release. When the 980 came out we were all wowed with the performance, and the Fury X just seems like a latecomer to the party. I was impressed enough with the 970 at release that it was my first Nvidia product since my GeForce 3, but this card doesn't give me that same feeling. Comparing it to an overclocked G1 isn't really reasonable at this point in the game. We don't know what the Fury X can really achieve in terms of overclocking. Nobody has even touched the memory on it. Hopefully once AMD provides the tools and information needed to overclock it we can see what it's really capable of. If the card forever remains at a sad 10% OC with no memory OC capability then I'll agree it was a bit of a failure, but we're sitting here at day 1 judging the first HBM graphics card a little harshly without giving it much of a chance.
Judging by the fact that the card seems to be slower on lower resolutions, we come back to the AMD driver optimization issues. The horsepower is definitely there, I believe that this card will be a better bet for someone who might want to keep it for more than a year, for the temps and the raw power under there alone. Also NVIDIA seems to be on the habit of abandoning older cards, and I'm afraid on what's gonna happen to Maxwell once Pascal is out (remember Kepler?)
First card to support a whopping 512 bit interface and later adopted a GDDR4 memory, first gpu to move up from GDDR3. The card was hyped to wipe the floor with the 8800 series and was aimed at the 8800 Ultra but then... I am sure you followed the news back then, perhaps more than I did.
Thing is, this card isn't being let back by memory performance; it needs more shader performance. An increase in memory isnt going to magically make it destroy the 980ti. This card isn't a brand new architecture either so its not going to get a huge performance boost from drivers, its still based on the 290x and drivers for it have been mature.. AMD cards never have had the same OC headroom as NV cards. A very good 980ti will do 1550-1600mhz on the core with 8ghz memory and thats on air.. Lower temps always brings out better OC due to leakage effects. We are only seeing out of all the reviews that a fury x will do 1125-1150 on average with a sustained load temp of high 40s.. I dont think voltage tuning will help much for this card.
I wouldn't say the two situations are quite the same. We're seeing benchmarks of the Fury X being on par with the 980 Ti at 4k resolution. It's already holding its own in its price bracket and comes standard with watercooling. To me that gives it a very slight price/performance edge. Even if they don't manage to unleash significantly more power and overclocking through driver/BIOS updates the card offers respectable performance for its price. I think if they don't manage to pull that off it'll really disappoint people. I know I'll be disappointed if this watercooled beast with much hyped HBM memory goes nowhere from its stock clocks. I don't think the biggest problem for this card is a failure to compete, but a failure to live up to its hype. You don't watercool a card and then say "Surprise! It can't overclock!"
I agreed with you for a second but then i checked the prices of both gpus, and R9 Fury x 699€ gtx 980 ti 680€ non-reference with the g1 version for 710€ gtx 980 ti 670€ reference
To be fair, I would probably get the Fury just for the watercooling and the vbios switch alone. All the FPS differences will disappear in the next 6 months, but the watercooler and the modding potential is there. If the gap was there @4k I would get the 980Ti, but for now it seems that with a bit of driver optimization and Windows 10, there will be no gap.
Considering how noisy the Fury X's cooling is in idle, I wouldn't count it as pro necessarily. Both cards are roughly equal at 4K though custom 980 Ti's are faster and have more VRAM. It doesn't mean much though since both cards are too slow for 4K. Both will keep improving their drivers.
AMD seems to have much more space to grow with their driver, especially if you see the performance on lower resolutions, where it is obvious that the driver can't feed the card fast enough. The difference in load noise is immense btw, as is the fact that the whole card/pcb is watercooled and operating in lower temps in general, something that surely matters for the longevity/oc potential once the tools we have support it.
I don't plan to purchase either anyway, and i have no interest in 4k. What i look at mostly is 1080p and 1440p to be honest and even then my next gpu upgrade won't be any sooner than 2017. And last, i never go with the most high end, their value returns aren't that great and they become obsolete a year down the road. I try to look for mid to lower high end cards when they are on sale. Got my r9 290 pcs+ for 240 euros. Now it costs almost 300 euros.
Fact is tho we have seen way worse from amd in the past. At least the fury somewhat competes with 980 ti.
