This could be the savior for the 390X and below series. They had a great bundle with the Gold award back in the day and if they do that again, this could help sales. Under the 970 price with 3 decent games would be a tempting offer.
-
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.
Possible Radeon 390X / 390 and 380X Spec / Benchmark (do not hotlink images!!!!!!)
- Thread starter Boomstick777
- Start date
- Status
This could be the savior for the 390X and below series. They had a great bundle with the Gold award back in the day and if they do that again, this could help sales. Under the 970 price with 3 decent games would be a tempting offer.
Associate
- Joined
- 2 Apr 2011
- Posts
- 1,205
2 years for this lol. I hope it's not true.
Just spotted this and from what I can make it out, it has no capacitors!
Hotlinked image.
It's just some poor photochop job to demonstrate how short the FuryX PCBs will be.
There was a 970 up for sub £230 the other day at a competitor. A rebranded 290X is going to struggle to compete in the minds of most people, even if the performance is very similar.
Just looked and found a few for a £5 less than that. A 390X at £220 perhaps?
If the 4gb is not enough to 4K the 295X2 should beat the TX at lower res, but not at 4K...but it does beat it at 4K...
But you can check the 290X 4gb as well, the difference between the TX and the 290X is the same at 1080p and 2160p...the 290x not falling behind because of the 4gb.
Soldato
- Joined
- 5 Sep 2011
- Posts
- 12,883
- Location
- Surrey
Won't say I told you so
Soldato
- Joined
- 14 Dec 2013
- Posts
- 2,589
I do see what your saying but I think it is very much game dependant as some titles will need more than 4GB to run smoothly and give a pleasant experience at 4K with maxed settings (particularly Ubisoft nonsense)
.He He I bet Sapphires webmaster is fuming. He goes to all the trouble of setting up the new R3xx pages then makes a start on the R9 Fury pages turns to the art guy and says right pass me the pics and spec info, and the art guy says "what pics and spec info". They then say sod it and go to the pub and leave that section blank !
Methinks someone at Sapphire is going to get a slapped danny!
Sapphire R9 FuryX
Just checking their support downloads and it seems its known as R9 Fury 4G D5 - Oops!
Is there a direct link to this one?
I can't get anything to show up when clicking the fury and fury x links
edit: never mind, found it
Last edited:
He He I bet Sapphires webmaster is fuming. He goes to all the trouble of setting up the new R3xx pages then makes a start on the R9 Fury pages turns to the art guy and says right pass me the pics and spec info, and the art guy says "what pics and spec info". They then say sod it and go to the pub and leave that section blank !
Methinks someone at Sapphire is going to get a slapped danny!
Sapphire R9 FuryX
Just checking their support downloads and it seems its known as R9 Fury 4G D5 - Oops!
0MHz!
Soldato
- Joined
- 5 Sep 2011
- Posts
- 12,883
- Location
- Surrey
It's not nearly as cut and dry as that though, is it.
i do not get why ppl are complaining, AMD just added double memory to their card and gave it a brand.
200 will still sell,ppl who feel they need more ram will get a 300 series, for that he will pay the extra 100 bucks or so.
then ppl who are after high end will get the Fury to play with.
and personaly i do see why they choosed this strategy, makes sense, if i dont have extra money to spend on R&D on a new architecture without real benefits, i would rather just make 1 architecture to push perf and maybe some features on 28nm as high end, and then wait 6-8 months for 16nm finfet, to introduce complete line up.
it's much more cost effective, but for this to work Fury need to be at least equal to TitanX, the 200 series need to be cheap, and the 300 series an OK premium price.
200 will still sell,ppl who feel they need more ram will get a 300 series, for that he will pay the extra 100 bucks or so.
then ppl who are after high end will get the Fury to play with.
and personaly i do see why they choosed this strategy, makes sense, if i dont have extra money to spend on R&D on a new architecture without real benefits, i would rather just make 1 architecture to push perf and maybe some features on 28nm as high end, and then wait 6-8 months for 16nm finfet, to introduce complete line up.
it's much more cost effective, but for this to work Fury need to be at least equal to TitanX, the 200 series need to be cheap, and the 300 series an OK premium price.
I'm curious if amd release new drivers together with the cards, they will i think. The guys trying the w10 drivers already reporting nice performance boosts in dx11.
If they release the cards with the rewised drivers, that could give them a boost (and the older cards as well)
If they release the cards with the rewised drivers, that could give them a boost (and the older cards as well)
Caporegime
- Joined
- 8 Jul 2003
- Posts
- 30,063
- Location
- In a house
0MHz and only 2GB vram, it'll easily beat out a TX 
Nvidias finished!
Nvidias finished!
- Status