From the conclusion of their review:
And at the end of the day, that's how you measure a graphics card.
-
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.
Radeon FURY thread
- Thread starter truther
- Start date
From the conclusion of their review:
And at the end of the day, that's how you measure a graphics card.
From the conclusion of their review:
And at the end of the day, that's how you measure a graphics card.
And their webcast was done later which had one of them talking about parity. When i get time later i'll link it.
Caporegime
All game that favour Nvidia, none the less look at the performance difference between the 390X and Fury-X in that, thats not a big gap for the Fury none X to fit in, why is there so little difference between them?
Permabanned
How are people arguing about this, Ti smashes the Fury X in the majority of cases.
Soldato
Looks to be coming out at £450ish, not worth it imo (may as well wait for a Ti deal about £500!!). Only 2 AIB's releasing them is realllllllllllly bad news for pricing too
Agreed, if it's that price I will just pull the trigger on a 980 Ti when I see a good deal.
My top picks atm are.
MSI GTX 980 Ti Gaming.
Gigabyte G1 SOC GTX 980 Ti.
EVGA Hybrid GTX 980 Ti.
Looking forward to reviews / pricing on these Fury's tomorrow, then I can decide which to go for. (Fury X isn't an option for me after the hassle I had with first one lol).
Caporegime
That doesn't make those tests any less relevant, as wouldn't running games that favour AMD. In all my tests, the Fury X is getting beaten and quite badly and some of those games do favour AMD.
Caporegime
They do in your test where your running a 15% factory overclock on a Titan-X and some of those games have much lower detail settings on the TX.
Caporegime
I would have bought a factory OC on the Fury X but none available
Not sure why you keep insinuating that my settings are much lower on the Titan X, when this isn't the case. I put my hands up to making mistakes with early video's but they were all corrected from early on and you have been told this several times. It kinda hurts when all my work gets these comments.
Can you show me one video that has lowered details?
Soldato
At 4k FuryX wins, so its the more powerful GPU. I fully expect the Fury to outpace the 980 at 4k.
At 240p my phone could probably run games with higher fps than a Fury or FuryX, does that make it note powerful?
At 240p my phone could probably run games with higher fps than a Fury or FuryX, does that make it note powerful?
Last edited:
Caporegime
Not rue I'm afraid, Gregster admitted to his error and all the videos have been redone. Stop trying to taint all his hard work just because you don't like the results.
Last edited:
That is simply false. AT best you could say the FuryX is not noticeable slower at 4K. It is just a plain fact that it is not as fats at 4K and certainly not faster.that is just the way it is. And your quip about resolution is nonsense, how does the fact that the FuryX does well at 4K help the vast majority of people on 1080p or 1440p?
Caporegime
I would have bought a factory OC on the Fury X but none available
Not sure why you keep insinuating that my settings are much lower on the Titan X, when this isn't the case. I put my hands up to making mistakes with early video's but they were all corrected from early on and you have been told this several times. It kinda hurts when all my work gets these comments.
Can you show me one video that has lowered details?
It is what it is, its like me saying a GTX 970 looses to a 290 when in fact the GTX 970 was reference stock and my 290 has a 10% factory overclock, quite rightfully i would be accused of trolling.
1, we know Fury-X does not compete with the Titan-X
2, it certainly would not compete if the Titan-X is overclocked
Its disingenuous just to say
Last edited:
Soldato
You don't need a high end GPU for 1080p. When voltage is unlocked on the Fury's, they will smash the back doors in on their counterparts, that's even before driver maturation. Someone get the sponges, Nvidia is on the ropes lol.
oh didnt know that
yeh that and ASUS always tend to sell well i think
maybe its smart move i duno
bit sad people wont be able choose msi or gigabyte!?
even powercolor
...maybe more will come later
Caporegime
So no video's to show me the lowered quality that you keep saying then?
And what card is AMD's flagship competing against? I am not putting the Fury X down btw and I wouldn't have bought one if I didn't want to see what HBM and what AMD could achieve with it.
Edit:
I will step out now as I see it is becoming a fanboy thread. I was just giving my tuppence worth after using both flagship cards. No offence meant
Sure, if you don't want to be running high settings at a constantly high (say, 100+) fps.
If you do, then you do. A massive majority of the gamers are at 1080p and high framerate gaming is a big thing.Sure, that will happen, any day now, it's just around the corner.
Soldato
I know this is in response to what that other guy said, but he is correct in the the Fury X does well at 4K, trading blows with the 980 Ti, win some lose some. He was hardly talking nonsense just putting forward his own opinion. There is no need for people to get upset. We all have different opinions.
Regarding 1080P if that was your res their are good much cheaper options like GTX 970 / R9 390 over say a Fury X or 980 Ti. Fury X really is targeted for higher resolutions.
Peace.