• 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.

**AMD Fiji Thread**

nashathedog said:
It's interesting how the Fury wins every test and then loses every test once both cards are overclocked.

http://videocardz.com/?p=56728
Click to expand...

Looks like AMD made a mistake :)

OC_Results.jpg
 
Last edited:
TheRealDeal said:
The Fury is only overclocked by 100mhz from what AMD said. We don't know what the gtx980ti overclock is. It could be way higher but we should know better when decent overclockers get a hold of them and add some voltage. Memory overclocking is going to be interesting as well.
Click to expand...

no the fury wasn't overclocked, they gave u the performance per 100mhz of overclock which is 5%, meaning if you overclock 500mhz you get 25%, now need to wait for reviews to see how good they are at overclocking, but from what the card engineer said during the conference, it's sounding to be a good overclocking gpu.
 
Davedree said:
it's funny though as nutella and others who were cherry picking the witcher results claiming improved tesselation isn't due to clocks, or memory timings.
Forgot to mention this clock for clock page.
Click to expand...

Do you often double tessellation performance with a 50mhz clock increase? Just curious.

The tessellation game settings are different to the clock to clock settings. Due to...testing different things. Just a pointer. I'm not arguing the FPS result is doubled on the 390x. I'm pointing out testing the tessellation performance appears to show a great improvement between the two.
 
Last edited:
Nutella33 said:
Do you often double tessellation performance with a 50mhz clock increase? Just curious.


The tessellation game settings are different to the clock to clock settings. Due to...testing different things. Just a pointer.
Click to expand...


edit it's 100 mhz differnce on the core, and memory clock is 600mhz difference

nutella this is a nightmare as it's over 3 different threads, it shouldn't really be in here as it's fiji.

it's still not an apples for apples test like it is when they did the clock for clock test. Their turning up all the settings apples for apples test is unfair as it doesn't have equal clocks on the 290x and 390x, they should have tested a 290x 8gb and clock for clock.

Also in other games the apples to apples (but not clocks tests) the variance in fps in my opinion is just demonstrative of just clock speed differences. But i don't trust hardocp either.
 
Last edited:
Davedree said:
nutella this is a nightmare as it's over 3 different threads, it shouldn't really be in here as it's fiji.

it's still not an apples for apples test like it is when they did the clock for clock test. Their turning up all the settings apples for apples test is unfair as it doesn't have equal clocks on the 290x and 390x, they should have tested a 290x 8gb and clock for clock.

Also in other games the apples to apples (but not clocks tests) the variance in fps in my opinion is just demonstrative of just clock speed differences. But i don't trust hardocp either.
Click to expand...
You referenced it here in this thread, not me. And referanced yourself posting a 3 series link in a fiji topic yet are complaining to me for being off topic?

as per your second paragraph... you are saying a 50mhz increase and more RAM doubles tessellation performance. despite us not seeing this effect on 8GB 290x's? (overclocked or otherwise)

on your 3rd... it might be a driver difference just for the witcher. it might be the 390x's "tweaks". All I ever said was it was interesting and might point to some changes.
 
nashathedog said:
It's interesting how the Fury wins every test and then loses every test once both cards are overclocked.

http://videocardz.com/?p=56728
Click to expand...

unfortunately there are errors in those charts.

Whycry has said there are errors, and he mentions it in the article.

Overclock Performance Table

WhyCry: This chart has an error, the right column is not 980 Ti, but overclocked Fury X. If you don’t believe check benchmark settings, 980 Ti does not support Mantle.
Click to expand...

furybench2.jpg


I also notice another in the main bench chart. I've circled both in red.
Obviously something is slightly amiss, as clearly the 980ti does not support mantle and Whycry reckons it not even suppose to say 980ti in the right hand column of the overclock performance chart. Quite what is up remains to be seen.

furybench1.jpg
 
bru said:
I also notice another in the main bench chart. I've circled both in red.
Obviously something is slightly amiss, as clearly the 980ti does not support mantle and Whycry reckons it not even suppose to say 980ti in the right hand column of the overclock performance chart. Quite what is up remains to be seen.
Click to expand...

Sounds like its meant to be fury on the right hand column as well as the left, making both columns fury based so mantle could be on for the testing?
 
Nutella33 said:
You referenced it here in this thread, not me.

as per your second paragraph... you are saying a 50mhz increase and more RAM doubles tessellation performance. despite us not seeing this effect on 8GB 290x's? (overclocked or otherwise)

on your 3rd... it might be a driver difference just for the witcher. it might be the 390x's "tweaks". All I ever said was it was interesting and might point to some changes.
Click to expand...

It's 100 mhz and 600mhz on the ram with suspect testing and driver difference. You provided the link and didn't mention the minimal difference in other games, or the clock for clock testing so i'm making it aware too fella. I'm not seeing double tesselation either, it's less.

I'm not saying more ram doubles performance either, i'm saying test a r9 290x 8gb vs a 390x with comparable drivers and testing enivironment with exact clocks.
 
Last edited:
Davedree said:
It's 100 mhz and 600mhz on the ram with suspect testing and driver difference. You provided the link and didn't mention the minimal difference in other games, or the clock for clock testing so i'm making it aware too fella.
Click to expand...

again does that often double tessellation performance? If I OC my card the same way will I get those results? I would suggest not.

I didn't mention it because its not a remarkable thing.... For unknown reasons I picked the interesting result :rolleyes:

~edit~ You edited. I'm not suggesting it couldn't be a driver difference. I just pointed out its a noticeable difference in the results. All I got as a reply from you and others was "nuh uh, rebrand" as you seem happy to accept the different drivers on the final apple to apple comparison...
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom