Official OcUK Fury X Review Thread

Bonjour · 24 Jun 2015 at 23:31

andybird123 said:
When you've had to put up with weeks of hearing how amazing AMD's next card will be, a little bit of "I told you so" from people who pointed out some inconsistencies in what was being said is well to be expected.

There are a few constructive posts. There are much more along the lines of..

"Where is AMDMatt when you need some more BS about how great AMD is?"

"Gotta laugh, what a flop"

and "NVIDIA Ti RULES" (<- seriously. I didn't even make this one up)

Temp.sgk · 24 Jun 2015 at 23:31

With all the reviews coming in, have any article directly spoked on Fury's HBM with 4 GB of ram and how it copes in games that Exceed 4 GB ram usage?

CAT-THE-FIFTH · 24 Jun 2015 at 23:32

andybird123 said:
Where did I say I was suffering?
I was pointing out that the AMD fans were setting themselves up for a comeuppance, and the end result is the hilarity that is ensuing now.

I find the ocuk forums a source of great amusement, never suffering.

But again you said you had to put up with it meaning you were suffering psychologically from the annoyance.
However, the most hope was in the various AMD Fury threads not Nvidia ones in general so you did not need to read them and put up with anything.

rolypolyman · 24 Jun 2015 at 23:32

GoogalyMoogaly said:
People are waiting on user benchmarks now, but I suspect it won't change anything, people will only believe the ones that back up what they want to believe and dismiss the ones they don't.

Take exception there Googaly I am no fanboy and have had a huge variety of cards spanning 20+ years. Sure at the moment I favour Amd but only because of Nvidia's treatment, or lack of, of 970 owners, thought it was disgraceful to be honest. Anyway I do like the look of some 980Ti's but I really want to punish Nvidia by not buying their card, thats how I feel.

Mei · 24 Jun 2015 at 23:33

ihatelag said:
Pretty much a nice positive AMD review...though it's sadly compared to being better than the 980 than the 980Ti which every fanboy on here was claiming over the last week.

It got a OC3D gold award...so it does have some merit, but no real competition to the 980Ti.

did no one else laugh when he complained about it being too small ><

andybird123 · 24 Jun 2015 at 23:34

CAT-THE-FIFTH said:
But again you said you had to put up with it meaning you were suffering psychologically from the annoyance.
However, the most hope was in the various AMD Fury threads not Nvidia ones in general so you did not need to read them and put up with anything.

I didn't say I was putting up with anything, as I haven't been gloating, I was pointing out why some people might be gloating.

Wizzfizz · 24 Jun 2015 at 23:37

Tom looks stoned throughout that review, or he's dying for a poo

Boomstick777 · 24 Jun 2015 at 23:38

Mtom said:
I read what the sites said:

Techpowerup - Highly recommended
Guru 3d - Recommended
Overclockers3D - gold award

Yes it is a bit behind the 980Ti, and most people waited for something stronger, but it still is a good card, hardly laughable...and certainly not competing with the 980.
The launch was bad thats sure, but for me its certain that somethings not right..i think its the drivers not working well with HBM, because the GPU surely has the grunt, but the results are very inconsistent...they are changing by review site/settings/resoluton.....

Mtom I think engaging with him might be a bad idea. He thinks the Fury X uses 'Magic' when it beats 980 Ti and the Titan X, and Nvidia use 'proper new tech'.

Good post and I totally agree, think that maybe logical posts at some of the guys here are wasted.

Mtom · 24 Jun 2015 at 23:41

Boomstick777 said:
Mtom I think engaging with him might be a bad idea. He thinks the Fury X uses 'Magic' when it beats 980 Ti and the Titan X, and Nvidia use 'proper new tech'.

Good post and I totally agree, think that maybe logical posts at some of the guys here are wasted.

You're right..no point to argue.

CAT-THE-FIFTH · 24 Jun 2015 at 23:42

andybird123 said:
I didn't say I was putting up with anything, as I haven't been gloating, I was pointing out why some people might be gloating.

But you did:

"When you've had to put up with weeks...."

Seriously, outside the obvious Fury threads most of the others in this sub-forum were nothing to do with the cards at all.

Nobody needed to put up with anything unless you physically wanted to be in the threads to read about the rumours for the cards.

Plus if someone did try trolling Nv threads then tell the mods!!

Combat squirrel · 24 Jun 2015 at 23:52

Its not bad, but it doesnt beat 980ti in enough performance to make it a clear choice, of course Titan X retains its crown.

For me ill be sticking with my r290x crossfire as its a faster setup, albeit 2 cards.

Back in the day the r290x was a stonking card as its still playing the 4k arena (the res I play at)

Mr Krugga · 25 Jun 2015 at 00:00

Anandtech benchmark results are up (GTX 980 Ti vs Fury X):

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/1513?vs=1496

LoadsaMoney · 25 Jun 2015 at 00:02

Just been going through the reviews again, and im still completely baffled, for example, Hexus, in GTA V - 1440p, Furys getting 97, Ti is getting 100, 3fps is nowt, yet in other reviews, same res, Ti is absolutely smashing it, and PCper even have this :-

Well, this isn't a great start for the AMD Fury X. It is barely outperforming the Radeon R9 290X at 2560x1440

Gerard · 25 Jun 2015 at 00:07

LoadsaMoney said:
Just been going through the reviews again, and im still completely baffled, for example, Hexus, in GTA V - 1440p, Furys getting 97, Ti is getting 100, 3fps is nowt, yet in other reviews, same res, Ti is absolutely smashing it, and PCper even have this :-

Doing the same myself, seems weird that the results are so different. Hardware canucks liked it, as did guru 3d and others. :confused:

CAT-THE-FIFTH · 25 Jun 2015 at 00:09

What's more amazing is that someone at AMD thought it was fit to release to reviewers in this state and at the same price as the GTX980TI. Might be the same fools behind the FX9590....

Mei · 25 Jun 2015 at 00:11

LoadsaMoney said:
Just been going through the reviews again, and im still completely baffled, for example, Hexus, in GTA V - 1440p, Furys getting 97, Ti is getting 100, 3fps is nowt, yet in other reviews, same res, Ti is absolutely smashing it, and PCper even have this, and its way more than 3fps slower than the Ti :-

ye i do think some of the results dont make sense
like i said before thinking driver differences or bad sample cards, or both
you got to ask why AMD didnt prepare it better tho
i think there's a lot of butt covering going on instead of trying to work stuff out

LoadsaMoney · 25 Jun 2015 at 00:11

Gerard said:
Doing the same myself, seems weird that the results are so different. Hardware canucks liked it, as did guru 3d and others.

It does yeah, im totally lost now. :confused:

Gerard · 25 Jun 2015 at 00:13

LoadsaMoney said:
It does yeah, im totally lost now.

Could be down to the way they test, i know hardocp and some sites do actual playthroughs lasting a while, some sites do like quick 1 minute run throughs which might not be enough to show the range of fps that other sites are showing.

CAT-THE-FIFTH · 25 Jun 2015 at 00:14

LoadsaMoney said:
It does yeah, im totally lost now.

Also considering that they probably knew the current inconsistencies with performance as they obviously tested the card beforehand.

Seriously, what were they thinking? They are just giving their competitors free PR paid out of their own pockets.

CAT-THE-FIFTH · 25 Jun 2015 at 00:16

Gerard said:
Could be down to the way they test, i know hardocp and some sites do actual playthroughs lasting a while, some sites do like quick 1 minute run throughs which might not be enough to show the range of fps that other sites are showing.

Some sites also pre-heat cards longer so to reduce the effects of short term boosting.

Plus some sites only use in game benchmark tools.

Competitor rules

****Official OcUK Fury X Review Thread****

Official OcUK Fury X Review Thread