• Notice regarding image hosts and attachments. See here.

  • 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

Yey. It maybe beats a card that is nearly a year old and it costs more.

Not that impressed, fair enough if you prefer AMD and have been waiting for them, but I would pay the extra for the X variant.
 
Just looking at benches and using the usual salt, none of them are impressive for this card. It doesn't make it a bad card but to be a good card, the price needs to be under a 980.
 
I think it needs to be under £400.

If it is priced over £400, anyone spending that sort of money will just buy a 980Ti or Fury X for a bit more.

The 390x needs to frop to £300 as well ( as does the 980)
 
humbug said:
The thing is AMD are increasing their GPGPU share, their workstation cards are pretty good, powerful, efficient and what matters here' big.

Fiji will eventually end up a workstation card and with its massive 8.6 TFlops of compute power it blows NV Maxwell 6.1 TFlops GM200 out of the water for around the same power consumption.

Workstation GPU's is really where all the money is at as they sell them for 3 thousand £ + a pop. sell just 1000 of those and its £3m banked.

Its worth competing in that space and they can't do that without big GPU's.
Click to expand...

By day I am a user and purchaser of workstation cards. It's the single sole reason why I have gone AMD at home for the last few years. Nvidia's merciless gouging on their Quadro cards, just because they can, is absolutely inexcusable to my mind.

I can't speak for those working with compute tasks, but for industrial 3D workloads the FirePro cards wipe the floor with the Quadro in terms of more for less, and have done for a few years now.

What's sad is that even in the professional space there are so many who are absolutely unswayable in their belief that Quadro cards are the only option.
 
From the data I'm not convinced this will over-clock that well - I'm hoping it does well as I've got a few friends looking to join the PC gaming market & would like to be able to recommend something from team red.
 
Stanners said:
Yey. It maybe beats a card that is nearly a year old and it costs more.

Not that impressed, fair enough if you prefer AMD and have been waiting for them, but I would pay the extra for the X variant.
Click to expand...

"It maybe beats a card"

In 9/10 1080p tests the fury pro beats the 980 and every test at 1440p or 4k. The 980 doesn't stand a chance (at stock anyway, it performs about as well as a 1350MHz 980 from what I see), there is no maybe about it.

I think it needs to be priced the same as the 980 though in my eyes, people have always paid more for the same performing nvidia card for whatever reason, AMD pricing it higher is a very bold move.
 
Last edited:
JediFragger said:
Gotta give it this though Andy, it's a compute monster!!!

http://semiaccurate.com/2015/07/10/looking-at-the-opencl-performance-of-amds-r9-fury-x/

I think these cards will only begin to really shine once DX12 games are upon us :cool:
Click to expand...

Single precision compute 53% higher than Hawaii, it is a monster.

gthlm said:
By day I am a user and purchaser of workstation cards. It's the single sole reason why I have gone AMD at home for the last few years. Nvidia's merciless gouging on their Quadro cards, just because they can, is absolutely inexcusable to my mind.

I can't speak for those working with compute tasks, but for industrial 3D workloads the FirePro cards wipe the floor with the Quadro in terms of more for less, and have done for a few years now.

What's sad is that even in the professional space there are so many who are absolutely unswayable in their belief that Quadro cards are the only option.
Click to expand...

Yes, people tend to go with what they know.

But to be fair.

I'm not a professional CAD developer but i do use my Hawaii card for some less advanced 3D work and have found my self frustrated by AMD's lack of compatibility in some arrears i really needed it to just work where the Nvidia side just does.
Having said that £850 for an ungimped card that i can use for such work, the GTX Titan, which is not even AS powerful? no thanks.

On a side note to that AMD don't tend to rip out the guts of the card for mainstream as much as Nvidia and then try to sell you one with some of the guts put back in for twice the money, i know the mainstream Hawaii cards are still not full fat workstation but they still have enough left for someone like me and for £300.

I do or have recommended Nvidia over AMD for some types of work as AMD had a serious issue with performance, or rather compatibility resulting in performance being poor or things just not working.
But, AMD have worked very hard to address those issues and it is getting better and better, to give you an example its not until very recently that something as simple as Blender would work properly on AMD's cards.

AMD are in relative terms new to this game, but they are getting to the stage just now where you have to ask given their efficiency, performance, price and these days compatibility why would you chose anything other than AMD?

Slowly AMD are gaining recognition in the industry, and with people like apple having gone from running almost exclusively Nvidia to running almost exclusively AMD its a sign that the mood is changing.
With each generation AMD get further ahead of Nvidia, even some of the most suborn of the green camps are going to start feeling a bit daft throwing more money at less.
 
Last edited:
Kaapstad said:
Very impressive performance from the Fury Pro.

The Witcher 3 @2160p looks a bit choppy though after playing it on a pile of TXs.:eek:
Click to expand...

Yeah, that's expected though. I wouldn't touch 4K even with my two 980Ti's.

Although it just shows how much grunt that "mid-range" card has, even with 4GB VRAM, and they didn't use the new 15.7 drivers. It's in those the Fury can beat even the 980Ti in two games. Far Cry 4 and Metro Last Light.

DX12 and next year for GPU tech is going to be exciting.
 
LoadsaMoney said:
lol, not impressive as its beating a card thats nearly a year old, and costs more, yet the 980, which came out to beat a card nearly a year old, that also cost more, was, you just couldn't make it up :p
Click to expand...

18th September 2014 is 12 months ago?

Interesting when the Fury launched and beat the 980 people complained the 980 wasn't OC'd. Now it's at 1517Mhz and still being beat people complain. Poor AMD can't get a break.

Gregster said:
Good watch and I was more impressed with the 980 in truth. The guy comes across as genuine and seemed honest.
Click to expand...

Can't say I am, I don't OC my GPUs at all as running the software for it open conflicts with other programs I use daily and crashes games.
So for me it makes the Fury seem like much better value.
 
The 290 was launched October 2013, the 980 was launched September 2014.

Orangey said:
I'm not clicking wccf so can only speculate they count the fanless idle mode as "silent".
Click to expand...

Its Anandtech that say the Furys quieter, in their review while gaming.

75699.png
 
Last edited:
Isn't it the same cooler they had on the 290 tri-x? Hence the silly-looking overhanging bit.

Not sure the dB level on that card but it was known for being quiet I think.
 
Fiji should be beating little maxwell though, even if it is cutdown fiji without voltage unlock. I honestly expected Fury X to surpass anything that nvidia had.
 
N19h7m4r3 said:
18th September 2014 is 12 months ago?

Interesting when the Fury launched and beat the 980 people complained the 980 wasn't OC'd. Now it's at 1517Mhz and still being beat people complain. Poor AMD can't get a break.



Can't say I am, I don't OC my GPUs at all as running the software for it open conflicts with other programs I use daily and crashes games.
So for me it makes the Fury seem like much better value.
Click to expand...

Everything you said is true, And amd have done a good job, Except for pricing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom