Radeon Fury X Beats GeForce GTX Titan X and Fury to GTX 980 Ti: 3DMark Bench

Discussion in 'Frontpage news' started by Hilbert Hagedoorn, Jun 17, 2015.

  1. alanm

    alanm Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    9,384
    Likes Received:
    1,619
    GPU:
    Asus 2080 Dual OC
    One thing thats striking about these benches is that both Fury cards are so close to their Nv counterparts that I believe AMD may have increased the clock speeds to match them. The exception being the ultra 5/8k benches where Nv take the lead and where it seems obvious the more vram played a part.
     
  2. A M D BugBear

    A M D BugBear Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    3,214
    Likes Received:
    319
    GPU:
    4 GTX 970-Quad Sli
    I took a peak on the 8k benchmark part, On the right side, only the 8 and the 12gb vram video cards stood up, all the rest, what appears to be out of vram, that's why the remaining others had very low score.

    This review should be interesting in what? In a week?
     
    Last edited: Jun 17, 2015
  3. Asgardi

    Asgardi Master Guru

    Messages:
    239
    Likes Received:
    13
    GPU:
    MSI GTX 980 Ti OC
    Any PC repair guy can confirm that you are:
    1. Liars
    2. Extremely lucky

    I bet my money on option 1.
     
  4. vidra

    vidra Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    2,623
    Likes Received:
    13
    GPU:
    EVGA GTX1060 6GB
    Good for AMD. It seems like a kick-ass card at a relatively reasonable price.
     

  5. Buck890

    Buck890 New Member

    Messages:
    3
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    R9 290x
    I have has ati/amd cards for a long time, the only time I've had problems with drivers is when I got a 3870x2. I had to format my pc and do a fresh install to get it to work, but otherwise had no problems at all.
     
  6. kakarot

    kakarot Maha Guru

    Messages:
    1,108
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    evga 980ti sc+
    Guys, if you are planing on using a single card drivers are a moot point. Don't even bother thinking about it, both companies are fantastic. However, I will not argue that nvidia has the upper hand once more cards are added but not many go that route in the first place
     
  7. ScoobyDooby

    ScoobyDooby Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    7,103
    Likes Received:
    70
    GPU:
    1080Ti & Acer X34
    That is the hope, yes.

    I'm glad to see AMD come back strong (potentially) with this series.. it was a long time coming.

    All the more reason why its so stupid to read all these green vs red bitching posts all over the place now that AMD seems to be back in business.
     
  8. isitalex

    isitalex New Member

    Messages:
    2
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    2* Asus Strix 970
    Probably the most sensible comment made today!

    I know people get excited over new tech, but shouldn't we all just calm down and wait for a proper review. Personally I can't see AMD making a big comeback with this card but I'd be happy to be wrong.
     
  9. Fender178

    Fender178 Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    4,070
    Likes Received:
    168
    GPU:
    GTX 1070 | GTX 1060
  10. xIcarus

    xIcarus Master Guru

    Messages:
    945
    Likes Received:
    90
    GPU:
    1080 Ti AORUS
    Time and time again I have to repeat the fact that higher TDP = more heat = less headroom for overclocking. So yeah. TDP actually matters quite a bit. You are on an enthusiast forum. Many of us overclock our cards like madmen. Why do you think the TX and 980Ti overclock so well?

    Not to mention that if Fury X happens to eat up 375W like was posted a few days ago the overclock is not only handicapped by the heat itself, but by sheer power draw itself. 2 8pin connectors + pci-e bus = 375W. Any more than that and you're getting out of the PCI-Express specs.
    We don't know what happens in that scenario. Your card could simply not overclock, your psu could explode, your cat could die, etc.
     

  11. xIcarus

    xIcarus Master Guru

    Messages:
    945
    Likes Received:
    90
    GPU:
    1080 Ti AORUS
    That is exactly why I'm worried about this, unlike many other users who seem to hype the product. HBM only solves one part of the equation. You can feed that GPU all the data you want, if it's not fast enough it wouldn't make a difference.
     
  12. Daftshadow

    Daftshadow Maha Guru

    Messages:
    1,317
    Likes Received:
    8
    GPU:
    MSI GTX 1080 Armor 8G OC
    all i care about are real time benchmarks in games
     
  13. Evildead666

    Evildead666 Maha Guru

    Messages:
    1,288
    Likes Received:
    270
    GPU:
    Vega64/EKWB/Noctua
    Fury X is set to be able to consume 375W, if you overclock it.
    Its the same power draw at standard clocks as the 290X, which would be 275/285W.

    Also, the 295x2 is quite able to go beyond the PCIe spec without killing kitties :)
     
  14. A M D BugBear

    A M D BugBear Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    3,214
    Likes Received:
    319
    GPU:
    4 GTX 970-Quad Sli
    6gb vram is still alot my friend, don't get me wrong but running games @ 8k? With only 4-6gb vram? Forget it.

    Even if the fury X had more then enough vram to push 8k, the card simply don't have enough raw horsepower to push something like that, especially with all the bells and whistles(aa/af/settings)intact.

    @ 4k-5k I can see, @ 8k??? no way, not at this present time, present gpu's are no where near as fast to do something like that, not yet, soon? I think yes, but now? No.

    I think even the dual Fury X will still have alot of problems at 8k, man, that is some extremely serious resolution, you better believe it.
     
    Last edited: Jun 17, 2015
  15. -Tj-

    -Tj- Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    16,882
    Likes Received:
    1,781
    GPU:
    Zotac GTX980Ti OC
    People already talk about 8k? All these newest gpus are not fast enough at 4k by recent games. Nvm vram debates..


    Imo GM200 & FijiXT are ideal for 1440p or 1620p, sometimes even a TitanX can barely keep up at 1440p and 60fps+.
     
    Last edited: Jun 17, 2015

  16. Deathchild

    Deathchild Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    3,970
    Likes Received:
    2
    GPU:
    -
    Not sure if a dp to dvi-d adapter would work....

    What are the qnix monitor guys gonna do? Only connection for me is dvi-d lol.

    Bad move by AMD tbh... leaving out all the dvi-d people. Why the **** put 3 dp ports on the back, wtf.. Maybe put 1 dvi-d lol? :D

    What if the adapter doesn't work and I have to get a ****ing new monitor lol.. wtf.

    Then it's nvidia I guess lol.
     
  17. -Tj-

    -Tj- Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    16,882
    Likes Received:
    1,781
    GPU:
    Zotac GTX980Ti OC
    And these dvi complains, dvi is the new vga, how many gpus still use vga?
     
  18. Steppzor

    Steppzor Master Guru

    Messages:
    783
    Likes Received:
    42
    GPU:
    MSI 1080 Ti GamingX
    Is there any news when the NDA lifts?
     
  19. Arend.C

    Arend.C Member Guru

    Messages:
    193
    Likes Received:
    1
    GPU:
    MSI GTX 970 Gaming
    I disagree with that statement. I care about TDP, so that makes be a non gamer?
     
  20. eclap

    eclap Banned

    Messages:
    31,497
    Likes Received:
    3
    GPU:
    Palit GR 1080 2000/11000
    AMD often release their top new architecture card that is faster than Nvidia. Nothing new here. 4870, 4890, 5870, 7970, 290x... they were all at least as fast as their nvidia counterpart, if not faster. Delving deeper into the history, you'll see times when AMD dominated (X1900XTX, XT, X1950XT).

    I don't see this Fury being a couple of frames faster than the Titan X as anything new from AMD. It's been done before, even in the very last few years.
     
    Last edited: Jun 17, 2015

Share This Page