• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

The Fury(X) Fiji Owners Thread

^^ It's hard to say without taking screenies. All I can really see is the deeper, more vibrant colours / contrasts of the Fury. I'll have a closer look tomorrow when I'm fresh. :D
 
Literally just from the first second of unblurred in game action when paused there are very large differences. First off the draw distance problems are not surprisingly still there and also not surprisingly the tree definition improved. As I said that is the kind of thing you'd expect to lose definition on lower video quality settings.

I would say, lighting and draw distance are very clearly using very different settings. As before the question is, is Nvidia 'optimising' these settings which is boosting performance while dropping IQ, or is it the game bugging out and not enabling certain things.

The tree at 16 seconds, 38 seconds as well, along with the wall and the areas of light rays on the building, they look so so much better on the Fury. I think it's fair to say the performance gap would reduce noticeably with better lighting and higher draw distance enabled on the Titan, how much and what the IQ differences would be then, who knows.

haha, head to 52 seconds in or so, on the Fury you can see the zebra crossing type marks on the far side of the crossing, then click back and you can see it appears in low quality at about 48/49 seconds and is clearly visible at 50 seconds. On the Titan this literally a white smudge till 53 seconds which is the first time you see distinct white lines appear and fully 54 seconds before it becomes clearly visible(though still a bit more blurry). Even worse is the Titan video is about 2 seconds ahead at this point. So pretty obvious large detail is appearing basically 6 seconds later on the Titan while the player runs at full pelt. That is pretty terrible.

A good way to visualise that is that on the Titan you can't see the second zebra crossing till you are standing on the first one. If you go back to 50 seconds you can see how far away the first crossing is and you can already see the second one on the Fury and at that point you're pretty damn far away from it.


38fps more(at that particularly point, but the IQ sucks balls.
 
Last edited:
Boomstick777 said:
Fury X with pump noise:

Plain or with sticker.

iygaQ2E.jpg

oqMt3bT.jpg

Fury X with revised Pump (Fixed pump noise):

Engraved Cooler Master Logo.

ufHC2In.jpg
Click to expand...

I wouldn't mind giving the Fury X a second chance (sent back mine due to pump noise) if only I could be sure that the next time I buy one it will be with the "fixed" pump.

Unfortunately I don't see a way to make sure of that on purchase :(
 
Dicehunter said:
Very funky looking, some tom foolery going on here.

We need some more testers :)
Click to expand...

Impossible to tell much from those images. They are not aligned, the character isn't even in the same position. The only fair way to compare from a still would be to render the exact same image with each card.

Edit: You would need to have both cards at there default IQ settings aswell.
 
Last edited:
Good job Greg. More investigating is required, as the FX looks much better than the TX which looks washed out in comparison.

How about just taking screen shots standing in identical places? Would be quicker also.

Maybe boom and kaps should try it out also, maybe something Greg is doing without realising is causing the difference in quality.
 
MadMossy said:
Can't really comment on modern cards, but back in the day, ATI cards always had the better IQ over nvidia. It's what lead me to pick ATI over nvidia nearly a decade ago.
Click to expand...

This is oddly true. Going between the 4 and 5 series AMD cards you could really tell a difference in some of the shaders in certain games between them and NVIDIA cards. I say really, it wasn't a deal breaker but it was better. AMD's 2D quality has been better predominantly as well. Would be hard to tell the difference these days though
 
TNA said:
The thing is, the whole point in spending so much money on a graphics card is better graphics...
Click to expand...

I actually agree with you. Unfortunately raw fps has been (practically) the sole focus of GPU reviews for many, many years.

My favourite graphics card that I've owned was a Matrox Millennium G400 Max. The image quality on that thing was amazing. All the more noticeable when I replaced it with a Geforce DDR, which was totally washed out.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom