AMD R9 Fury X reviews!

[yacoub]

This is the first time I can remember where Anandtech didn't have its review up for a major GPU release right when the NDA lifted. Odd.

As for what we're seeing so far, I couldn't care less about overclocking, since that's a subjective and variable benefit anyway. I care how it does stock, and it looks like pretty much par with the 980Ti, which is good for the sake of AMD having a peer to the 980Ti, however it also needs to be cheaper in order for me to consider something with only 4GB of VRAM.

 

[Atomic Playboy]

I'm actually impressed with the showing at 4K; seems like driver revisions might improve performance at lower resolutions, because it's hanging with the 980ti at 4K. But if I buy a card for 4K, I want to know that I'm going to be able to output to a 4K TV, and the lack of HDMI 2.0 kills that plan. I'm still utterly dumbstruck by that decision.

Ultimately, I don't think AMD did enough to dissuade me from a 980ti; not at an equal price point, anyway. If they had undercut Nvidia on price, I'd have one in my Newegg cart right now. But this card has more red flags for me than a 980ti at this point, and that's a bummer; I've had a pretty good streak going of alternating between Nvidia and AMD/ATI over my past few builds.

 

[thehotsung8701A]

Miss out on the 980ti and the free Batman game. Thanks AMD

 

[jackstar7]

Well, I bit on the briefly showing $550 Visiontek at TD, though whether it ever shows up is another matter entirely. I'm hopeful that 3440x1440 is enough resolution to let the Fury X shine. Otherwise, I'll need to jump to the 980ti. But either way, a single-GPU solution is what I'm after.

Sadly no one tests at 3440x1440 these days. Too niche.

 

[LTC8K6]

Miss out on the 980ti and the free Batman game. Thanks AMD

Go ahead:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814127871&cm_re=980ti-_-14-127-871-_-Product

 

[thehotsung8701A]

Go ahead:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814127871&cm_re=980ti-_-14-127-871-_-Product

Would have to research who makes the best 980ti card and what model I want. Also that $20 more than what I want to pay.

Also no triple monitor if this is the case. I need a drink. I'm going to drink. Screw this.

 

[NTMBK]

Would have to research who makes the best 980ti card and what model I want. Also that $20 more than what I want to pay.

Also no triple monitor if this is the case. I need a drink. I'm going to drink. Screw this.

Chill out, it's just a bunch of video games

 

[exar333]

Well, I bit on the briefly showing $550 Visiontek at TD, though whether it ever shows up is another matter entirely. I'm hopeful that 3440x1440 is enough resolution to let the Fury X shine. Otherwise, I'll need to jump to the 980ti. But either way, a single-GPU solution is what I'm after.

Sadly no one tests at 3440x1440 these days. Too niche.

Not a big deal. Just subtract ~25% from the fps on the 1440P results. My rue of thumb is that if 1440P performance can get ~75+ reliably, thats perfect for maxing the UW.

Agree though, wish they included it more....

 

[LTC8K6]

Would have to research who makes the best 980ti card and what model I want. Also that $20 more than what I want to pay.

Also no triple monitor if this is the case. I need a drink. I'm going to drink. Screw this.

Should have done your 980ti research already...

 

[MagickMan]

I said before that I felt Fury X would OC well on the core, it seems that I may be wrong.

https://youtu.be/rfCb6oiJ6EI?t=545

ah heck...

 

[thehotsung8701A]

Should have done your 980ti research already...

I did do research on it but halfway I decided that I couldn't go with Nvidia due to lack of Surround support on their end. I would probably go with Evga or Msi quite frankly but which version I am not clear about.

 

[chimaxi83]

Miss out on the 980ti and the free Batman game. Thanks AMD

Would have to research who makes the best 980ti card and what model I want. Also that $20 more than what I want to pay.

Also no triple monitor if this is the case. I need a drink. I'm going to drink. Screw this.

Can't talk about disappointment here because the mods will just lock it up so back to your comment. I did do research on it but halfway I decided that I couldn't go with Nvidia due to lack of Surround support on their end. I would probably go with Evga or Msi quite frankly but which version I am not clear about.

Already a thread for whining and Nvidia comparisons.

http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2436910

 

[exar333]

This is the first time I can remember where Anandtech didn't have its review up for a major GPU release right when the NDA lifted. Odd.
As for what we're seeing so far, I couldn't care less about overclocking, since that's a subjective and variable benefit anyway. I care how it does stock, and it looks like pretty much par with the 980Ti, which is good for the sake of AMD having a peer to the 980Ti, however it also needs to be cheaper in order for me to consider something with only 4GB of VRAM.

Yeah, agreed. Wasn't the 960Ti also really late? It doesn't seem the Purch buyout seemed to add anything, maybe just make the reviews worse.

I will still read the AT review, but I question the review process if it relies entirely on one person. People get sick, they have things outside work, they shouldn't prevent a key deliverable. Not great management. I digress...

Waiting to see some more CF reviews as well

 

[Headfoot]

I said before that I felt Fury X would OC well on the core, it seems that I may be wrong.
ah heck...

No dude. No utilities let you move voltage yet. We have no idea how Fury X actually overclocks. We only know how it overclocks on stock volts. Which is like saying you know how to ride a bike, only with training wheels.

 

[Headfoot]

delete

 

[LTC8K6]

No dude. No utilities let you move voltage yet. We have no idea how Fury X actually overclocks. We only know how it overclocks on stock volts. Which is like saying you know how to ride a bike, only with training wheels.

But we do know what having to increase the voltage generally means.

 

[swilli89]

Looks decent look forward to crossfire reviews.

 

[exar333]

Looks decent look forward to crossfire reviews.

This.

You can't ignore FCAT. I would gladly lose a few fps to gain smoothness on higher res/hz setups...

 

[SketchMaster]

To me this a decent win overall for AMD.

AMD is actually innovating again, they have gotten power draw to a reasonable state, and have more or less caught up with Nvidia within the price bracket. We may even get a surprise with windows 10 and find out AMD created a hell of a card for DX12 gaming. Will I run out an buy one? No. I am happy to see it on the market though.

If anything, it shows AMD is slowly getting its act back together - with it's GFX chips anyway - and will keep NV from monopolizing the market.

So while it's a small win, it's still a win.

 

[jackstar7]

Not a big deal. Just subtract ~25% from the fps on the 1440P results. My rue of thumb is that if 1440P performance can get ~75+ reliably, thats perfect for maxing the UW.

Agree though, wish they included it more....

I'm not sure the equation works if Fury does better at higher resolutions though...weirdly.

 

[n0x1ous]

for anyone wondering about voltage levels.....

http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/R9_Fury_X/35.html

Really impressed with TPU review. I don't normally read there reviews, but RS got me to take a look and I would say it's the best one that I have read today. Very broad and impartial look at the situation.

I think this card should be $549 and it would be a hit. I had the Visiontek model in my cart at Tigerdirect for $549 but it changed to full price by the time I got to the end of checkout. I will wait for now and see how things settle down after Fury Pro and nano come out.

 

[exar333]

I'm not sure the equation works if Fury does better at higher resolutions though...weirdly.

It will still be awfully close. 3440x1440 is much closer in pixels to 1440P vs 2160P. Maybe subtract 22%? Either way, its not going to be drastically different...

 

[flopper]

To me this a decent win overall for AMD.

AMD is actually innovating again, they have gotten power draw to a reasonable state, and have more or less caught up with Nvidia within the price bracket. We may even get a surprise with windows 10 and find out AMD created a hell of a card for DX12 gaming. Will I run out an buy one? No. I am happy to see it on the market though.

If anything, it shows AMD is slowly getting its act back together - with it's GFX chips anyway - and will keep NV from monopolizing the market.

So while it's a small win, it's still a win.

aye happy, waiting for the 14.

 

[exar333]

To me this a decent win overall for AMD.

AMD is actually innovating again, they have gotten power draw to a reasonable state, and have more or less caught up with Nvidia within the price bracket. We may even get a surprise with windows 10 and find out AMD created a hell of a card for DX12 gaming. Will I run out an buy one? No. I am happy to see it on the market though.

If anything, it shows AMD is slowly getting its act back together - with it's GFX chips anyway - and will keep NV from monopolizing the market.

So while it's a small win, it's still a win.

The Fury X is a fine card, but part of their power savings NV will also see, without any arch changes, next year when they go HBM as well. Thats a temp, 1-time advantage. On the other hand, it doesn't seem this is the only power savings brought to the table, so thats good.

Innovation, however, should bring something real and tangible. HBM is great, but what is that really delivering other than a smaller card and 15-25 less Watts? AMD wasn't memory bandwidth starved already, now they are still not but capacity-limited for the time being.

What has AMD released that capitalizes on their HBM advantage? Nothing really. The Fury X is a great card, but will a card a few inches shorter really be a game-changer? Throw two of those on a card and have a standard card-length option and thats a unique offering. Something NV doesn't have...

The Nano also isn't out either. I think AMD had a LOT of positive momentum after last week's E3. Yes they had a good deal of re-brands, but Fury was exciting. To follow-through with just a single product and the rest TBD is a little disappointing IMHO.

What a difference a week makes.

 

[LTC8K6]

Looks decent look forward to crossfire reviews.

So then you need a place for at least two radiators, or three or four if you want one of those uber setups.

If you have a water cooled CPU, how are all these radiators going to work? :biggrin: