Support NeoGAF

wachie · Jun 24, 2015

http://www.computerbase.de/2015-06/amd-radeon-r9-fury-x-test/
http://www.pcgameshardware.de/AMD-Radeon-Grafikkarte-255597/Tests/Radeon-R9-Fury-X-Test-1162693/
http://hothardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-r9-fury-x-review-fiji-and-hbm-put-to-the-test
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-r9-fury-x,4196.html
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/R9_Fury_X/
http://www.hardocp.com/article/2015/06/24/amd_radeon_r9_fury_x_video_card_review
http://www.guru3d.com/articles-pages/amd-radeon-r9-fury-x-review,1.html
http://www.overclock3d.net/reviews/gpu_displays/amd_r9_fury_x_review/1
http://www.hardware.fr/articles/937-1/amd-radeon-r9-fury-x-gpu-fiji-memoire-hbm-test.html
http://hexus.net/tech/reviews/graphics/84170-amd-radeon-r9-fury-x-4gb/
http://www.hardwareheaven.com/content/reviews/graphics-cards/58089/amd-radeon-r9-fury-x-review
http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/foru.../69682-amd-r9-fury-x-review-fiji-arrives.html

Updating.

ValfarHL · Jun 24, 2015

I am excite!

Blastoise · Jun 24, 2015

980ti seems to be benchmarking better in almost all the tests.

taimoorh · Jun 24, 2015

Except for Far Cry 4 and Metro 2033, the 980ti beats it in every 4K test.

Vash63 · Jun 24, 2015

Wow. Was really expecting more given the die size and memory bandwidth. Hope these numbers aren't accurate from oc3d.

Makes me wish I'd bit on a 980 ti on launch day.

CHC · Jun 24, 2015

Well at least you all can thank AMD for your $650 (not $800) 980 Ti's.

Osiris · Jun 24, 2015

Look at the benchmarks for the 1080p tests

How the hell is the Fury X so much slower than the 980ti at the lower resolutions??

Zaph · Jun 24, 2015

Hardocp Conclusion said:
The new AMD Fiji GPU and Fury X video card looks awesome on paper, but has underwhelmed and disappointed us when it comes to real world gameplay. The AMD Radeon R9 Fury X feels like a proof of concept for HBM technology.

Ouch. Guess that explains the odd AMD benchmark settings.

Tadie · Jun 24, 2015

This is not looking really good for AMD.

I think Nvidia made a smart move to ship the 980 TI before Fury launched.

KingSnake · Jun 24, 2015

I guess that settles it for me, 980 ti it's my next card. At least they tried.

Felix Lighter · Jun 24, 2015

I'm a bit surprised by these results. Performance at 4K is competitive but lower res benches put it behind the 980 in cases.

Kysen · Jun 24, 2015

Looks like nvidia caught them off guard with the 980ti. The fury vs the plain 980 is an easy win.

The Llama · Jun 24, 2015

Jeez, the 980 ti is just too good in most of these tests.

dEvAnGeL · Jun 24, 2015

so the 980ti manages to be faster in pretty much every game benchmark,at the same price tag as the 980ti with 2 less gigs of vram, hmm, interesting

cleveridea · Jun 24, 2015

Ouch at the HardOCP review

Hard to imagine Titan X being lowered in price for a looooooong time

nephilimdj · Jun 24, 2015

Seems like its best to hold off a few weeks for the Fury Pro, to see how that shapes up

Be interesting to see how it overclocks once tools support it, I mean its full load temp is 51c

wachie · Jun 24, 2015

Felix Lighter said:
I'm a bit surprised by these results. Performance at 4K is competitive but lower res benches put it behind the 980 in cases.

Expected.

LabouredSubterfuge · Jun 24, 2015

The overclocking situation sounds very disappointing.

cleveridea · Jun 24, 2015

Has anyone found a benchmark for arkham knight?

Chucke1992 · Jun 24, 2015

By the way - Fury X is there top card now?

Osiris · Jun 24, 2015

wachie said:
Expected.

Expected a little disparity, maybe... but this level of disparity @ 1080p was not expected.

That's a frankly shocking difference.

dEvAnGeL · Jun 24, 2015

Osiris said:
Expected a little disparity, maybe... but this level of disparity @ 1080p was not expected.

That's a frankly shocking difference.

it is, considering you can get a 980 for than $500 and the difference is 2 to 5 frames give or take, ouch

Condom · Jun 24, 2015

Seems like it really doesn't compete with the 980TI that much. Either driver issues or simply not good enough.

KungFucius · Jun 24, 2015

Wow AMD shit the bed on this one.

I still can't believe they don't have HDMI 2.0 and are trying to claim 4k performance.

wachie · Jun 24, 2015

Osiris said:
Expected a little disparity, maybe... but this level of disparity @ 1080p was not expected.

That's a frankly shocking difference.

That's one game, cherry picking can get a whole lot of different results. For example.

cleveridea said:
Has anyone found a benchmark for arkham knight?

http://www.hardwareheaven.com/content/reviews/graphics-cards/58089/amd-radeon-r9-fury-x-review

Xyber · Jun 24, 2015

So this card gets destroyed by 980ti when it comes to overclocking, expected it to do a little better than that. The water cooling seems almost like a waste, Sweclockers said the pump was noisy and their card had coil whine.

Pooya · Jun 24, 2015

$650 for a high end water cooled card is really good if you ask me. I hope its size and cooling become standard on high end, would be great for SFF builds.

Musician · Jun 24, 2015

Very disappointing. I was hoping to drive my 120hz 1080 screen (and possibly future occulus) with a fury x. Not only because it seemed perfect for it beforehand, but nvidia really needs some serious competition to avoid a possible monopoly situation.

As it stands there's no way I can justify the purchase over a 980ti right now. Sorry AMD. I really hope you survive.

ZOONAMI · Jun 24, 2015

Hmm looking like a 970 itx or 980 might be a better way to go than the upcoming nano.

Radec · Jun 24, 2015

hmmn...

http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/foru...682-amd-r9-fury-x-review-fiji-arrives-22.html

ZOONAMI · Jun 24, 2015

Radec said:
hmmn...

This is pretty good actually

NeOak · Jun 24, 2015

wachie said:
That's one game, cherry picking can get a whole lot of different results. For example.

http://www.hardwareheaven.com/content/reviews/graphics-cards/58089/amd-radeon-r9-fury-x-review

Not really. Some of us play with 1080p 144Hz monitors, so 1080p is still important.

Oh well, I guess I can keep the 7970 GE a while longer :/

derFeef · Jun 24, 2015

Can we merge the threads? Its a bit confusing

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1069403

NeOak said:
Not really. Some of us play with 1080p 144Hz monitors, so 1080p is still important.

Oh well, I guess I can keep the 7970 GE a while longer :/

You can always use downsampling I guess.

sirap · Jun 24, 2015

I'm impressed. Driver updates will only make this better. Love how cool and quiet this thing is, and if I hadn't already ordered two Titan X's I would probably go with AMD this time.

Malaysia is hot as fuck.

wachie · Jun 24, 2015

NeOak said:
Not really. Some of us play with 1080p 144Hz monitors, so 1080p is still important.

Oh well, I guess I can keep the 7970 GE a while longer :/

I'm not saying 1080p isn't important. Picking out just one game/setting to paint it performs at 980 level seems hyperbole.

For example

That is an average across 20+ games and settings.

Nachtmaer · Jun 24, 2015

I always had a feeling it wasn't going to outright beat the 980 Ti, but after all the hype I didn't expect it to come just short of it. Still seems like a solid card that finally brings some competition. I wonder how much more performance they can squeeze out of it with drivers in the future.

bomblord1 · Jun 24, 2015

Waiting for OC benchmarks and AMD to release optimized drivers.

Support NeoGAF

AMD Radeon Fury X Review Thread | $649 | Available Now

Member

Member

Banned

Member

Member

Member

I permanently banned my 6 year old daughter from using the PS4 for mistakenly sending grief reports as it's too hard to watch or talk to her

Member

Member

The Birthday Skeleton

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Banned

I permanently banned my 6 year old daughter from using the PS4 for mistakenly sending grief reports as it's too hard to watch or talk to her

Member

Member

King Snowflake

Member

Member

Member

Member

Junior Member

Member

Junior Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Banned

Similar threads