Radeon FURY thread

[N19h7m4r3]

I haven't bothered really looking at these as I was underwhelmed by the FuryX and then read only 2 versions of these fury cards would be made.

So what's the general consensus? Are they worth buying in place of the FuryX? Are they only slightly worse than the FuryX but at a reasonable price?

Problem I have is I would want 2 of them for 1440p but if they are stupidly priced and hardly better than my 290 tri-x I might as well buy a 2nd of that instead

The Fury does well above 1080p, even beats the 980Ti in Far Cry 4, and Metro Last Light.

It also has better Crossfire scaling than the 980GTX in SLI

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/sapphire-amd-radeon-r9-fury-tri-x-overclocked,4216-4.html


Fury 1133Mhz vs GTX 980 1517Mhz

 

[RavenXXX2]

Looking at an outlay of £700 for fury crossfire after selling on the 290x, it aint worth it. Best to double up on the 290.

 

[SiDeards73]

So much fail

 

[KillBoY_UK]

Could it also be possible that yields of the Fury-X "full core" are that bad?

I imagine it is a combination of factors but yields are the first thing that springs to mind. If it is just a case of the AIO then AMD have shot themselves in the foot by not allowing Fury-X cards to be launched with custom coolers, especially if the cores are otherwise fully functional...

I suspect the Fury core yelds them self are not that bad but its the new HBM chips which have the realy bad yelds being brand new tech.

 

[DAnDan]

I'm gonna say not worth as they are coming in at £400+.

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/1522?vs=1438

£400 and they could just about be worth it over a standard 980 (unless the rumoured 980 price cuts come in), but much more and people will go either side. Either the 980Ti/FuryX for however much less than £100 more, or save a bit less than £100 and get the 980/390X range.

 

[bru]

I suspect the Fury core yelds them self are not that bad but its the new HBM chips which have the realy bad yelds being brand new tech.

Well it cannot be the HBM, if the Fury nonX is in good supply as it uses the same HBM chips the Fury X does. it has to be either the AIO cooler, or the actual full fat Fiji chip. I mean there is no way AMD would hold back fully working chips for use in the Fury nonX, seeing as there has been a shortage of X's. ( well unless they really have lost the plot of course )

 

[Vinno]

I'm kinda at that juncture dandan.

a 980 isn't really powerful enough for me to justify over £360 on one. So by that logic the Fury isnt fast enough to warrant being over £400. For £100 more I can get a 980ti which is more than fast enough for my needs.

At £350 I'd snap one of these up, probably. But that's not going to happen.

 

[MoodyB]

*me thinks someone's not bothered to check specs off Saph or Asus as they both come with dp to dvi adaptor*

Checking their webpages never came to mind

Just depends on the price diff between Asus & Sapphire now then.

 

[RavenXXX2]

I'm kinda at that juncture dandan.

a 980 isn't really powerful enough for me to justify over £360 on one. So by that logic the Fury isnt fast enough to warrant being over £400. For £100 more I can get a 980ti which is more than fast enough for my needs.

At £350 I'd snap one of these up, probably. But that's not going to happen.

Not with the 390X doing the rounds at £350.

 

[humbug]

Not with the 390X doing the rounds at £350.

Sad thing is the 390X nor GTX 980 are a worthwhile upgrade for me with a 290.

290's released at about £300 2 years ago, i paid £320 for my PCS+, now you can have +10% for £350.

What a load of old ####!

 

[SiDeards73]

Sad thing is the 390X nor GTX 980 are a worthwhile upgrade for me with a 290.

290's released at about £300 2 years ago, i paid £320 for my PCS+, now you can have +10% for £350.

What a load of old ####!

This is exactly what im feeling Humbug, and the FuryX is hardly inspiring either, although i am tempted to buy the FuryX2 when it comes for a single card 1440p solution, also for VR, will wait it out, worst case is i end up waiting for a die shrink card

 

[humbug]

This is exactly what im feeling Humbug, and the FuryX is hardly inspiring either, although i am tempted to buy the FuryX2 when it comes for a single card 1440p solution, also for VR, will wait it out, worst case is i end up waiting for a die shrink card

Fury None X, overclock my 290 and i'm almost there......

 

[nitram100]

GPU market is a bit of a mess at the moment!

 

[Martini1991]

Fury None X, overclock my 290 and i'm almost there......

Must agree with you Humbug, like I say, AMD have completely let me down this year.
They've done nothing of worth to me since they launched the 290X.

 

[Kaapstad]

Fury None X, overclock my 290 and i'm almost there......

Must agree with you Humbug, like I say, AMD have completely let me down this year.
They've done nothing of worth to me since they launched the 290X.

The thing I would criticise AMD for with the Fury Pro is they have disabled too many cores and there is too big a gap to the Fury X.

The difference between the 290P and X is smaller making the pro version more interesting.

 

[humbug]

I'm going to hold out for 16nm or 20nm or whatever it will be.

For now i'll spend what i'm saving up on a bigger SSD, CoolerMaster are coming out with a new case soon, apparently it replaces the HAF 912 i have had for too many years and its just what i'm looking for.

And a new Screen perhaps, that will keep me happy. I just hope my current GPU out lives its warranty for as long as it needs to.

 

[humbug]

The thing I would criticise AMD for with the Fury Pro is they have disabled too many cores and there is too big a gap to the Fury X.

The difference between the 290P and X is smaller making the pro version more interesting.

Fiji just isn't performing as well as it should, I said this so many times but its worth saying over and over again. 45% more Shaders, 60% more memory bandwidth, clock for clock at 1440P its 19% faster than Hawaii-XT.

Whats wrong with it? seriously, overclock a Hawaii-XT and you can't tell them apart.

 

[Martini1991]

The thing I would criticise AMD for with the Fury Pro is they have disabled too many cores and there is too big a gap to the Fury X.

The difference between the 290P and X is smaller making the pro version more interesting.

290's 9% less cores, the Fury's 12.5% less. It's not *that* bad.

I'm more than happy for a pure 12.5% performance difference in the top two tier cards.

 

[SiDeards73]

Honestly i just cant fathom what possessed AMD to release the Fiji cards as they are, considering what Nvidia done with the Maxwell cards, surely AMD must have known it wouldnt be well received?

DX12 will help us 290 owners as well, i dont even want to buy a new monitor now til i see the next round of cards, as you pretty much lock yourself into a vendor now with monitors, i need to see what Nvidia and AMD bring in 2016.

 

[DAnDan]

Honestly i just cant fathom what possessed AMD to release the Fiji cards as they are, considering what Nvidia done with the Maxwell cards, surely AMD must have known it wouldnt be well received?

DX12 will help us 290 owners as well, i dont even want to buy a new monitor now til i see the next round of cards, as you pretty much lock yourself into a vendor now with monitors, i need to see what Nvidia and AMD bring in 2016.

The Fury/Fury X aren't that bad though? Perhaps a little expensive for the performance they offer, but nowhere near as bad as you're making it out to be?

The stock issue is the biggest problem with the Fury X, realistically for most people it hasn't launched yet, stock just doesn't exist!