15.15-180612a-18565BE switched number with random character year 2018 (lol idiot) day 12 (claiming it was 18) made up driver versioning. (fake driver)
OMG the drama, and the willingness to swallow... anything: fake driver increases Fury perf. for up to 2.7%. NOT! Just imagine if true: That would leave only 27% of OC 980 Ti left to cover
If I went back in time, I would probably have a USB key on me that had some drivers at least Just sayin'... edit : If USB was still around, which is like Intel staying around.
30 FPS in GTA 5 at 4K maxed out. That what new AMD with HMB and 4096 shaders can do right now. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8hnuj1OZAJs have more on single GTX980.. :roll:
No you don't, not maxed out you don't. EDIT: What I mean is, your 980 does not outperform a Fury X in GTA V.
apparently it does... when both OC-ed 4K: http://techreport.com/review/28513/amd-radeon-r9-fury-x-graphics-card-reviewed/7
tom's hardware : http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-r9-fury-x,4196-4.html these "reviews" are starting to look doctored. Nvidia localized sites poor performance, AMD localized sites say great performance, it truly has become very hard to find a true benchmark, Even here it feels lopsided with a rushed review to insure the card isn't able to get the proper driver for a proper review.
Abit outperform. Same settings, also all advenced on max. My over-clock are even not high, just +150 GPU and +300 VMEM - for SLI use. Also after change "AMD CHS" on "softshadows" it give me huge FPS gain - and i preffer more. EDIT : I had above 30FPS most of time. But the game stutter after some time when exploring map fast. Not comfortable to play that way. Point is.. this time stuttering not come from ATI drivers! Its the game - reflection MSAAx8.
true, but neither is that youtube video that got us started, and Fury is already stuttering madly even at those settings
They sent the review driver out with the package. Holy ****. You're seriously blaming someone like Hilbert, for taking the driver AMD GAVE HIM, and benchmarking the card with it? Honestly I can't wait for the Anandtech/Ryan Smith review to be posted. Because I think most people agree that it's one of the most trusted/reputable sites (Not that Guru3D isn't but they are both up there). You can already look at his Fury X benchmark scores in the 2015 test bench. And out of every benchmark I've seen the Fury X looks far worse on Anandtech, then even here on Guru3D. The bottom line is that the 64 ROPS/4GB makes it a bitch to test on. The card doesn't even max out at 512GB/S of ram. In fact on all black textures the 980Ti nearly matches the bandwidth of the HBM using compression. Because of this depending on the test, MSAA, etc you can make the FPS fast but the card stutter (PC Per talks about this in GTAV) or vice versa.
"reviews"... really? This thinking really says more about you than about those reviews. Can we leave conspiracy theories out if this? I have yet to find any well known reviewer faking his results. I have no doubt that even those stupendous AMD benchmarks are repeatable, verifiable and undoctored!
again http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-r9-fury-x,4196-4.html look at farcry 4 , Fury X beats titan. The games guru3d used, are all of them with the Nvidia startup logo ?
Even if there are more benchmarks, in which we can find such settings that GTX980Ti surpasses Fury, it does not change the fact that the GTX 980Ti, is now outdated technology. The last big dinosaur generation of GDDR. You can overclock it painfully - that's a fact, but it's still a dead end in the evolution of graphics cards.