FineWine===>FineVinegar FuryX Aging Horrible in 2017

[Toothless]

Expecting a flagship card from 2.5 years ago to still perform like a flagship? You're gonna have a bad time.

Once a flag always a flag. It's like those old veterans that can still kick butt at triple the age.

 

[Fouquin]

Yet you don't expect GTX 980/R9 390 beating Fury X, that is a sign of terrible aging. Probably a lot worse than Kepler since Fury X was faster than 980 and their own R9 390 at launch.

https://www.purepc.pl/karty_graficz...duty_wwii_dramat_graczy_i_zolnierzy?page=0,10

https://www.purepc.pl/karty_graficz...duty_wwii_dramat_graczy_i_zolnierzy?page=0,11

https://www.purepc.pl/karty_graficz..._s_creed_origins_problemy_w_egipcie?page=0,10

https://www.purepc.pl/karty_graficz...th_shadow_of_war_srodziemie_w_ogniu?page=0,11

https://www.purepc.pl/karty_graficz...jnosci_kart_graficznych_i_procesorow?page=0,8

https://www.purepc.pl/procesory/tes..._death_of_the_outsider_bywalo_gorzej?page=0,9


RX580 beats the crap out of it consistently. It's like 1060 would beat 980Ti/TXM all the time for the nvidia side of things.

When you cherry pick your results, you can push any agenda. Here, let me do the same using the exact source you just used.

Here's the Fury X exactly where it should be, above the Fury and below the 980 Ti.

Here it is again only 2FPS behind the 980 Ti in minimums and handily beating everything that it should.

In this test it's tied with the 980 Ti.

In this test it's going after the 1070, leaving the 980 Ti in the dust!

Well the 980 Ti caught up again and put the Fury X back in it's place, above the Fury, 390X, and 580.

And finally we see it chugging a bit, but still holding it's rightful place.

Paints quite a different picture.

 

[Vayra86]

When you cherry pick your results, you can push any agenda. Here, let me do the same using the exact source you just used.

Here's the Fury X exactly where it should be, above the Fury and below the 980 Ti.

Here it is again only 2FPS behind the 980 Ti in minimums and handily beating everything that it should.

In this test it's tied with the 980 Ti.

In this test it's going after the 1070, leaving the 980 Ti in the dust!

Well the 980 Ti caught up again and put the Fury X back in it's place, above the Fury, 390X, and 580.

And finally we see it chugging a bit, but still holding it's rightful place.

Paints quite a different picture.

Sorry but 'below 980ti' on the resolutions that favor FuryX's HBM really is not a good result. Not in the least because you don't get OC results here but stock, and the 980ti can OC a lot further. Your first link puts it all in great perspective and is very real - FuryX is below where it should be especially at 4K.

CoD WW2 has it sitting where it should be. But across a large suite of games, it sits about 15% below where it's expected and supposed to be, and no matter what you do with it, it won't budge to any higher position, while the 980ti can surpass the 1070 stock easily.

 

[Fouquin]

Sorry but 'below 980ti' on the resolutions that favor FuryX's HBM really is not a good result. Not in the least because you don't get OC results here but stock, and the 980ti can OC a lot further. Your first link puts it all in great perspective and is very real - FuryX is below where it should be especially at 4K.

CoD WW2 has it sitting where it should be.

It's sitting right where it's been since launch.

 

[Vayra86]

It's sitting right where it's been since launch.

Yes, so it aged horribly The other cards made strides since launch. Especially on stuff like PCars 2 and especially at high res. Remember, this ties into the old AMD story of 'wait for next driver, it'll all be great' ie Fine Wine.

 

[Fouquin]

Yes, so it aged horribly The other cards made strides since launch. Especially on stuff like PCars 2 and especially at high res.

So if in my cherry picked results the other cards have "made strides," why is the Fury X still trailing the 980 Ti like it was in 2015? Surely if performance increased across the board it would have left the Fury X in the dust as the other set of cherry picked results show?

See how the data sets provide arguments for both sides of this debate? It's inconclusive at best.

 

[ShurikN]

Last time I checked Fury X was 1% slower than 980ti in TPUs latest GPU review. On 1080p

 

[Xzibit]

Last time I checked Fury X was 1% slower than 980ti in TPUs latest GPU review. On 1080p

Oh come on stop making sense. This is a xkm1948 thread. Only bashing AMD is approved here

Find the humor in it. Like how it took him 2.5yrs to come to such a conclusion, which I doubt we have heard the last of. Should have put that time to good use and saved up for a replacement if he was so displeased with it but he wouldn't have graced us with the countless AMD bashing post and threads.

I think he likes the trolling the attention.

 

[MuhammedAbdo]

Last time I checked Fury X was 1% slower than 980ti in TPUs latest GPU review. On 1080p

These reviews didn't test any of the new 2017 games mentioned in the post, so they don't apply in this situation. It usually takes several months for games to be added to the roster.

 

[Xzibit]

These reviews didn't test any of the new 2017 games mentioned in the post, so they don't apply in this situation. It usually takes several months for games to be added to the roster.

Call Of Duty WW2

980Ti is 35% faster than FuryX @1080p, and 25% faster @1440p

Are we taking bets on xkm1948 being the Reddit author ?

 

[cucker tarlson]

When you cherry pick your results, you can push any agenda. Here, let me do the same using the exact source you just used.

Here's the Fury X exactly where it should be, above the Fury and below the 980 Ti.

Here it is again only 2FPS behind the 980 Ti in minimums and handily beating everything that it should.

In this test it's tied with the 980 Ti.

In this test it's going after the 1070, leaving the 980 Ti in the dust!

Well the 980 Ti caught up again and put the Fury X back in it's place, above the Fury, 390X, and 580.

And finally we see it chugging a bit, but still holding it's rightful place.

Paints quite a different picture.

For all my comparisons I've chosen 1440p, max settings and always compare it to GTX 980. Yet it's me who's cherry picking. Yeah, right.
You choose whatever resolution and whatever card is convenient for you to make up the false image of the card. 980Ti was better at launch and aged better too. Double win for those who chose nvidia.

 

[RejZoR]

I love the "IT'S 35% FASTER THAN FURY X". Looks at the framerate, 7fps difference at 1080p and 4fps difference at 1440p. First at over 70fps already and second just at 60fps. Boo fookin' hoo.

 

[Fouquin]

For all my comparisons I've chosen 1440p, max settings and always compare it to GTX 980. Yet it's me who's cherry picking. Yeah, right.
You choose whatever resolution and whatever card is convenient for you to make up the false image of the card. 980Ti was better at launch and aged better too. Double win for those who chose nvidia.

By selecting specific results and not sharing the complete data, you are definitively cherry picking.

Cherry Picking:
Intentionally failing to use information suspected of being relevant and significant.

By omitting the rest of the data gathered in testing, whether by pattern or by personal preference to the narrative, you are cherry picking.

In the future it would help to bolster your narrative with data from more than a single source as well, as focusing on data from a single series of tests by one organization is also a form of cherry picking. As it was clearly shown above the tests done at TPU don't show the dramatic differences that your source showed, and that brings a lot into question about the validity of the data as a trustworthy baseline.

 

[Frick]

@Fouquin Can you put your last post in the form of a graph? It's the only thing people see.

 

[GreiverBlade]

Nvidia seems to have the best driver team/people out there honestly. Superb support for all cards.

aherm ... pfahahahahahaahahahahhahaah .....

sorry but i had to ... after using many time a driver 6 month old (or even older for some) with the Greens, because of instability, hiccups, CTD and other joyful things ....
funny tho with my reds (up to the R9 290) i never had to rollback once

the statement about driver supremacy is.... laughable at best... i almost did regret the 290 to 980 swap (yeah a sidegrade .... tho i got it for free)

on topics well ... yep 2.5yrs is old ... i'm even considering to buy a bricked Fury X for my nostalgic GPU collection (but only bricked .... if working the price would probably be too high to put it on a shelf ... i might considere replacing my 1070 with it just for laugh )

 

[ikeke]

It boils down to what colour underwear the person prefers, green only or red only. For the rest of us it's as simple as going out and buying a product that fits the intended use case.

 

[rtwjunkie]

Expecting a flagship card from 2.5 years ago to still perform like a flagship? You're gonna have a bad time.

^^This. Although my 980Ti performs excellent still, it doesn't perform like a flagship anymore. I don't expect it to either.

 

[cucker tarlson]

I don't get why I choose 5 out of 6 most recent games at the most popular resolution (for enthusiasts at least) where I compare Fury X to GTX 980 and get called for cherrypicking. A person posts a resolution of their choice for a game of their choice comparing the card to whatever they feel like comparing it to and that's somehow NOT cherrypicking.

Sorry to burst your bubble but finewine is bogus. It's always been too far fetched of a theory, repeated only by those who wanted to believe it.

 

[MuhammedAbdo]

Are we taking bets on xkm1948 being the Reddit author ?

That's one test against 6, all showing the FuryX considerably behind 980Ti:

http://www.pcgameshardware.de/Call-...-of-Duty-WW2-Technik-Test-Benchmarks-1242690/

https://www.computerbase.de/2017-11...abschnitt_frametimes_von_vega_64_und_gtx_1080

http://gamegpu.com/action-/-fps-/-tps/call-of-duty-wwii-test-gpu-cpu

http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/call_of_duty_ww2_pc_graphics_analysis_benchmark_review,4.html

https://overclock3d.net/reviews/software/call_of_duty_wwii_pc_performance_review/9

https://www.purepc.pl/karty_graficz..._duty_wwii_dramat_graczy_i_zolnierzy?page=0,9

 

[cucker tarlson]

That's one test against 6, all showing the FuryX considerably behind 980Ti:

http://www.pcgameshardware.de/Call-...-of-Duty-WW2-Technik-Test-Benchmarks-1242690/

https://www.computerbase.de/2017-11...abschnitt_frametimes_von_vega_64_und_gtx_1080

http://gamegpu.com/action-/-fps-/-tps/call-of-duty-wwii-test-gpu-cpu

http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/call_of_duty_ww2_pc_graphics_analysis_benchmark_review,4.html

https://overclock3d.net/reviews/software/call_of_duty_wwii_pc_performance_review/9

https://www.purepc.pl/karty_graficz..._duty_wwii_dramat_graczy_i_zolnierzy?page=0,9

apparently 5 out of 6 or 6 out of 7 is a standard for cherrypicking now, 1 out of 6 or 1 out of 7 is reliable info.

 

[MuhammedAbdo]

apparently 5 out of 6 or 6 out of 7 is a standard for cherrypicking now, 1 out of 6 or 1 out of 7 is reliable info.

Typical AMD fanboyism at work here. When Kepler dropped in a few games, the whole AMD fanbase started screaming: NVIDIA gimped their old GPUs, Kepler is bad. GCN ROCKS!! But when FuryX is flat out dropping in every AAA release, it's now cherrypicking. Double Standards at best.

 

[Fouquin]

That's one test against 6, all showing the FuryX considerably behind 980Ti:

http://www.pcgameshardware.de/Call-...-of-Duty-WW2-Technik-Test-Benchmarks-1242690/

https://www.computerbase.de/2017-11...abschnitt_frametimes_von_vega_64_und_gtx_1080

http://gamegpu.com/action-/-fps-/-tps/call-of-duty-wwii-test-gpu-cpu

http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/call_of_duty_ww2_pc_graphics_analysis_benchmark_review,4.html

https://overclock3d.net/reviews/software/call_of_duty_wwii_pc_performance_review/9

https://www.purepc.pl/karty_graficz..._duty_wwii_dramat_graczy_i_zolnierzy?page=0,9

See this is a good post showing a wider sample size. We've got multiple sources, variables, and testing methodologies all coming to a consensus. However, this is still only a single game and the consensus is "the Fury X performs poorly in this one game"

@cucker tarlson The reason you got called for cherry picking is because it took literally 5 minutes to find data for a counter argument from the one, single, solitary source you used. Show more data, use more sources.

 

[qubit]

Yeah yeah it is a Reddit discussion. It is more about summary of results across multiple review site.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/7ckjj5/furyx_aging_tremendously_bad_in_2017/


My personal opinion. Welp after 2.5 years of purchasing this card I regret the sh*it of my decision. Should have gone with 980Ti. Would be so much better.

Got burned hard by AMD flagship GPUs this round.


9700==>X1900==>3870==>4870==>5870==>FuryX

Seems it is about time I give green team a chance.

I'm not surprised that you got let down by underperforming AMD. I suggest getting a 1080 or maybe a 1080 Ti if you can stretch to that cost. You won't regret it.

 

[INSTG8R]

Meh mine is still doing just fine at 1440. I mean I have to settle in High settings in some stuff but I’m certainly not suffering, or whining...

 

[Vya Domus]

Ah , it's one of those threads.

Quickly , pick your team :

- Team xkm1948 , get an AMD card , complain all the time about it
- Team RejZoR , get an Nvidia card , complain all the time about it

Seriously , don't lie to yourself that AMD burned you , in the end ya'll bought exactly what you wanted. No one deceived you , you're all pretty smart. Coming after close to 3 years and complaining that your (once) very expensive and powerful card doesn't keep up and eat alive all the new games is rather meaningless and pointless to say the least.

How about the first Titan ? Paying 1000$ for it and now a 1060 trashes it ? Should those be mad too ? Did Nvidia burned them ? No , you should buy something and set a realistic expectation of how it will fare over time.

If you think Nvidia will give you a card that will provide unrivaled performance millennia after you bought it then by all means , be our guest no one is stopping you. I don't think it will but hey.