AMD Radeon R9 Fury X 4 GB

[lilhasselhoffer]

On a brave new world, we're still treading water in the 28 nm node.


Seriously, is anyone greatly surprised? The card competes with the highest end offerings of Nvidia, at around the same pricing point. As per usual, they tackled one issue (heat), but couldn't tackle anything else because the underlying chips are built on the same process that we used 4 years ago.


Objectively, HBM is interesting. I'm not paying $650 for an interesting experiment.
Objectively, the Fury was designed for 4K. As I don't have a 4K monitor its value can't be realized by me.
Objectively, neither AMD nor Nvidia are winners here. We've got another battle that is a toss-up. Worst of all, it's a toss-up the consumer loses every time.



Thanks AMD, for proving what Nvidia already has. Without huge investments, 28 nm is done. We've moved beyond the point of gains equaling investment, and by the time investment could actually see gains we'll have a die shrink to shake things up. Consider me waiting for the inevitable Arctic Islands vs. Pascal flame war. This little show has burned itself out.

 

[mroofie]

On a brave new world, we're still treading water in the 28 nm node.


Seriously, is anyone greatly surprised? The card competes with the highest end offerings of Nvidia, at around the same pricing point. As per usual, they tackled one issue (heat), but couldn't tackle anything else because the underlying chips are built on the same process that we used 4 years ago.


Objectively, HBM is interesting. I'm not paying $650 for an interesting experiment.
Objectively, the Fury was designed for 4K. As I don't have a 4K monitor its value can't be realized by me.
Objectively, neither AMD nor Nvidia are winners here. We've got another battle that is a toss-up. Worst of all, it's a toss-up the consumer loses every time.



Thanks AMD, for proving what Nvidia already has. Without huge investments, 28 nm is done. We've moved beyond the point of gains equaling investment, and by the time investment could actually see gains we'll have a die shrink to shake things up. Consider me waiting for the inevitable Arctic Islands vs. Pascal flame war. This little show has burned itself out.

Wow ............

 

[mirakul]

WAIT WAIT WAIT!!!!
My bad, really sorry.

 

[W1zzard]

WAIT WAIT WAIT!!!!
Why did you test the card with 15.5 beta??????
The driver for FuryX IS 15.15 for godsake. This whole review means NOTHING at all.

 

[GreiverBlade]

tit x has 3x more vram and is faster while consuming less energy.

yes... but i fail to see your point ... as for power consumption "ooohhh it will cost me more on my yearly electricity bill" (how much? ) also the 980Ti has 2gb more (but GDDR5 not HBM so the cost could also be the same)
so ... what do you try to say? that the card is a failure because it doesnt beat or scratch a titan X? while costing 400 less? so then the argument should be valid for the 980Ti to Titan X ?

ok i am finished with this thread enough is enough and time will tell us more funny story

 

[Ferrum Master]

Could it it be that at lower res the card actually starves for CPU performance. It doesn't matter crappy drivers or architecture issue... it needs more CPU horsepower to drive it?

 

[GhostRyder]

WAIT WAIT WAIT!!!!
Why did you test the card with 15.5 beta??????
The driver for FuryX IS 15.15 for godsake. This whole review means NOTHING at all.

R9 300 series was on 15.15 (Look again).

On a brave new world, we're still treading water in the 28 nm node.


Seriously, is anyone greatly surprised? The card competes with the highest end offerings of Nvidia, at around the same pricing point. As per usual, they tackled one issue (heat), but couldn't tackle anything else because the underlying chips are built on the same process that we used 4 years ago.


Objectively, HBM is interesting. I'm not paying $650 for an interesting experiment.
Objectively, the Fury was designed for 4K. As I don't have a 4K monitor its value can't be realized by me.
Objectively, neither AMD nor Nvidia are winners here. We've got another battle that is a toss-up. Worst of all, it's a toss-up the consumer loses every time.



Thanks AMD, for proving what Nvidia already has. Without huge investments, 28 nm is done. We've moved beyond the point of gains equaling investment, and by the time investment could actually see gains we'll have a die shrink to shake things up. Consider me waiting for the inevitable Arctic Islands vs. Pascal flame war. This little show has burned itself out.

True, sad but true as this round is not really much to speak of overall.

Either way, card does exactly what its supposed to. Its got great performance, lower power consumption (it basically if very close to Titan X and 980ti) and comes with an already great stock cooler. What do they need to wrap the card in solid gold to make it appealing at this point?

 

[Ebo]

Thx for a great review w1z .

Im not exactly jumping up and down in my chair right now.

Now all we can do is to wait for the custom aircooled R9 fury and see how it ends up.

Some of it might have something to do with inmature drivers, but that NOT all. That noise from the pump and the preformance i res lower than 4K ? thats the real deal breaker for me, NO thank you, not this time AMD.

 

[FrustratedGarrett]

1.Only at 4K (It performs quite well in most games)
2.Water vs Air cooling

Only fanboy here is you

Actually, I linked to the 4K charts by mistake. Here's FarCry4 at 2K:

I don't see how you can call this card slow, when it's on par with the TitanX in arguably the most visuall appealing game of the year.

 

[crazyeyesreaper]

Yeah but some boost stupidly high. Maxwell's perf lies in it's higher clocks. The 1400+Mhz boosts really push 980ti's to 15% improvements.



The 780ti was (tin foil hat required) hobbled to push the perceived perf of the 980ti. The 780ti was 'allowed' to get worse because Nv had a faster card to sell. In other words, Nvidia had a lot of room to work with to make their products look even better (against their own brand)

@W1zzard - On topic of the scores - why does it falter so much at <4K res? I've never understood that. Obviously the 980ti must take a hit from 1080p>1440p>4k. But how does the Fury X do so badly at lower res?

Most likely a ROP issue @the54thvoid They have 4096 shaders lots of TMUs but still 64 ROPs at higher resolutions the shaders flex their muscle but low res it holds it back. That would be my guess. HBM also helps at higher res to an extent. NVIDIA meanwhile has alot more ROPs does well at low res up to high res where the lesser memory bandwidth seems to have its performance fall back and AMD catches up across the board. Still only speculation but AMD has had this issue before.

7770 scaled up to 7870 was exact double but 7870 scaled up to 7970 was not they kept ROP count the same but doubled everything else. So seems to be a similar issue here as well.

They kept the same ROP count as the R9 290X / 390X but increased shader and TMU count.

 

[the54thvoid]

My humble opinion on the "Fury" subject is below

In 4K resolution (all other resolutions are too low for these monsters after all to have any problem playing in ultra settings):

Taking ALL games of W1z's review into consideration we have 10-10 for Fury X vs 980Ti (2 are draws)

By throwing the 3 totaly inbalanced games (PC, WoW and Wolfenstein are too green) into the equation we have 10 wins for red team and 7 for green team.

If we oblige the DR3 game from the competition (seems red balanced this) we still have 9-7 for Fury X.

So, having a same priced, lower temp, more quiet GPU which is somewhat better in 4K with not matured drivers yet is not good enough to buy it? Since when logic is crazyness and the opposite also?

And Nano will be a GREAT product if price is correct...

So, if we take out all the games that Nvidia does well in - AMD wins. Your logic is... astounding. As @W1zzard clearly stated - it all comes down to what you play but the spread of games is large and that gives a far better representation of real life performance. What is more disturbing is the frame times of the Fury X. The only other reviews so far I have read (Hexus and Tech Report) both make reference to the stutter it has. It's delivering a poorer gaming experience, even in titles where it has a higher fps.

I'm sorry to those this may offend but AMD clearly said it was the fastest GPU in the world. It's simply not. And then OC versus OC, it's cleanly beaten.

Is it a great card? Yes. The best - No.

Argue away but you're scientifically proven wrong (when science for our purposes is a meta analysis of reviews).

Actually, I linked to the 4K charts by mistake. Here's FarCry4 at 2K:

I don't see how you can call this card slow, when it's on par with the TitanX in arguably the most visuall appealing game of the year.

About that:

 

[newtekie1]

It performs quite well in most games and it's a lot quieter and cooler than 980 TI.

Quieter and cooler? Have you looked at the eVGA 980Ti review?

980Ti Idle=0db Load=35db
Fury X Idle=31db Load=32db

At idle the Fury X is one of the loudest cards ever tested! And at load it is basically equal to the 980Ti, close enough that the difference wouldn't be noticeable to the human ear.

As for cooler, it damn well better be, the thing is liquid cooled! But the Fury X is still putting out more heat than a 980Ti.

 

[Nihilus]

Does anyone know if this card is 1/4 DP? It would be the small saving grace for this card. AFAIK, Tahiti is still king of Dual Precision - a card released 3.5 years ago.
Also, it seems that 4 GB of ram did not hurt it at 4k in any of the reviews.

 

[lilhasselhoffer]

Wow ............

You know, one word responses are useless. The more I read from you, the more often I see something like that. Care to espouse what your reaction actually means?

 

[FrustratedGarrett]

So, if we take out all the games that Nvidia does well in - AMD wins. Your logic is... astounding. As @W1zzard clearly stated - it all comes down to what you play but the spread of games is large and that gives a far better representation of real life performance. What is more disturbing is the frame times of the Fury X. The only other reviews so far I have read (Hexus and Tech Report) both make reference to the stutter it has. It's delivering a poorer gaming experience, even in titles where it has a higher fps.

I'm sorry to those this may offend but AMD clearly said it was the fastest GPU in the world. It's simply not. And then OC versus OC, it's cleanly beaten.

Is it a great card? Yes. The best - No.

Argue away but you're scientifically proven wrong (when science for our purposes is a meta analysis of reviews).



About that:

No, you're acting like a shill and now you're giving me an irrelevant chart that doesn't even include the product in question.

 

[RCoon]

you're giving me an irrelevant chart that doesn't even include the product in question.

He's showing that a 980ti (the custom Gigabyte air cooler) is faster at this game you're pushing as graphically wonderful than the custom (water cooled) Fury X

 

[FrustratedGarrett]

Quieter and cooler? Have you looked at the eVGA 980Ti review?

980Ti Idle=0db Load=35db
Fury X Idle=31db Load=32db

At idle the Fury X is one of the loudest cards ever tested! And at load it is basically equal to the 980Ti, close enough that the difference wouldn't be noticeable to the human ear.

As for cooler, it damn well better be, the thing is liquid cooled! But the Fury X is still putting out more heat than a 980Ti.

This could be a fan control issue. The fan is not slowing down when the card is in idle. it's a matter of a driver fix. This doesn't change the fact that the FuryX is competitive with the TitanX/980Ti while being ATST better cooled and quiter on load.

 

[Frick]

It'll be a divider for sure and provide flaming adult discourse for months to come.

See my prophecy from mere hours ago has proven true!

I'm sorry to those this may offend but AMD clearly said it was the fastest GPU in the world. It's simply not. And then OC versus OC, it's cleanly beaten.

If you close one eye and only look at certain graphs it's the fastest.

 

[btarunr]

You know, one word responses are useless. The more I read from you, the more often I see something like that. Care to espouse what your reaction actually means?

Leo Tolstoy's War and Peace in Doge.

 

[the54thvoid]

If you close one eye and only look at certain graphs it's the fastest.

I literally LOL'ed.

No, you're acting like a shill and now you're giving me an irrelevant chart that doesn't even include the product in question.

And to you I say begone. Calling me a shill is fine. I don't care. I'm not one but i don't need to prove it. I'll enjoy playing with my 980ti Classy when i can get one and a block. You can enjoy that toy where you try to push shapes through holes. Remember to match them up properly now.

 

[nem]

Clearly AMD reduce the power consumtions ...o__________o

http://tpucdn.com/reviews/AMD/R9_Fury_X/images/power_average.gif

http://tpucdn.com/reviews/AMD/R9_Fury_X/images/power_peak.gif

 

[FrustratedGarrett]

I literally LOL'ed.



And to you I say begone. Calling me a shill is fine. I don't care. I'm not one but i don't need to prove it. I'll enjoy playing with my 980ti Classy when i can get one and a block. You can enjoy that toy where you try to push shapes through holes. Remember to match them up properly now.

I don't care about what you enjoy doing with your 980TI... why are you sharing all this information with me? The subject of discussion here is not your 980TI... Facepalm (

 

[mroofie]

You know, one word responses are useless. The more I read from you, the more often I see something like that. Care to espouse what your reaction actually means?

Look at the line where it's bold not rocket science

 

[the54thvoid]

I don't care about what you enjoy doing with your 980TI... why are you sharing all this information with me? The subject of discussion here is not your 980TI... Facepalm

I like to share. Sorry 'Shill'. I'm telling you because yours is the first post in this thread (I think) to name call someone - me, a 'shill'. So I throw a comment back at you. My tongue in cheek response being a remark that the 980ti Classy (being dual BIOS and therefore fun to flash) will fly like a rocket under water. It will pump green mist all over Fury X. I'm throwing a tech stone because you're being a tool by saying I sound like a 'shill' for speaking the truth. My irrelevant graph is directly under your quoted graph so both graphs can be compared. If you want more fire, the G1 980ti OC's a further 13% in W1zz's review (so about 90 fps versus [on OC level of 5%] 73 fps).

Your crazy defensive stance is not required. Only the idiots are laughing at AMD. I'm saddened it's not thumping Maxwell. But fact is, it seems that when pushed on OC (and this is most def a tech forum of nerds) the 980ti rips Fury X apart.

Sorry.

 

[Jborg]