• 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**

900x900px_LL_83de3750_batman_full.png

900x900px_LL_c3033d5e_dyeinglight_full.png

900x900px_LL_eeeb5548_witcher.png


3DMark 11. OC @ 1140Mhz (Voltage should improve clock?)

P19300

11poc.jpg

Compared with my Titan X.

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm11/9867137

MnP3REb.png
 
Last edited:
I think it looks ok so far.

The stock Fury X beats the stock 980 Ti and Titan X in Arkham Origins, and also stock Fury X beats stock 980 Ti in Witcher 3. I did not expect that tbh.

Once we get to see proper over clocking on these, they might actually be quite far ahead.
 
humbug:

for me its that 3DMark11 score that throws the whole thing into question, Boom, @ 1140Mhz its 5% faster than a 1250Mhz 290X. Christ i could get close with a 290P

That makes no sense.
Click to expand...

Yeah I'm not worried about that. To get my score my Titan X was clock at over 1400mhz. So that 3d Mark 11 score may well be legit.

Fury X overclocking will probably take some time before we get big OC numbers.
 
humbug:

Its one game Boom, we Know AMD are quite a bit faster in GTAV, and yet Fury-X only just has the 980TI, why is it so incredibly slow in 3DMark11?

Those slides look bad.

Edit, can't quote in this thread, the 290X clock for clock is 10% slower in 3DMar11, that is shocking.
Click to expand...

What's one game?

Fury X is ahead in, Arkham Origins, Witcher 3, Far Cry 4, GTAV (1080P) behind at 4K.

Looking pretty good so far. Overclocking Fury X is totally new. So that could change big time over next few weeks.

At stock Fury X looks like a beast against 980 Ti / Titan X, trades blows, loses some wins others. Same price as 980 Ti (Air Coolers) but with AIO. I would say it's looking pretty good.
 
Greebo:

Interesting that the fury x does best on 4k where it beats the 980ti in 4, matches in 2 and loses in just one.

at 1440p the 980ti is the faster card.

Not what i expected tbh
Click to expand...


The Maxwell architecture is seriously impressive.

I think we should all be a little bit afraid of Pascal.

So far it looks like AMD's best 28nm trades blows with Nvidia's best 28nm. So if you want an AIO thrown in for similar cost AMD look a good bet. If you prefer air cooling 980 Ti. When the Fury (Non X) and Nano launches things might become even more interesting at a lower price point.
 
Last edited:
Greebo:

I agree, pascal with 16gb of hbm2 is going to be silly.

Then again as the fasted card by a huge margin i can see the price been £1000.
Click to expand...

Yeah my bet is GP200 (Titan) £850+ with 16GB HBM 2.0

GP204 (1080?) £550+ with 8GB HBM 2.0

A long way off though, probably Q2/Q3 2016.
 
I'm sure with newer drivers and custom bios these cards will get better and better. Voltage control would also add a lot.

£509.99 for a GPU that comes with AIO trades blows with Nvidia's best and runs at 49C is pretty impressive.

For those on the fence the custom Fury (Non X) cards should be more appealing, with cheaper price points. And if they aren't Nano might be the one.

AMD have done well imho. GM200 is a beast, Fury X is a beast.
 
I'm pretty impressed overall. Seems to have varying performance (Early driver issues?). When it does well it does really well trading blows sometimes ahead.

It's early days for the Fury X. With custom BIOS. Driver updates and hopefully voltage unlock things could get very interesting.

I'll see how I get on with my card tomorrow before making a decision. I like to try these things myself.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom