• 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.

Fury vs 980ti

As far as I'm aware, the 980ti is faster at 1080p to 1440p, though it's much closer at 4k. The Fury X does take pull ahead in the odd game and is quieter and much cooler.

Hmmm...not sure about overclocking. Out of the box, I think the 980ti does better in this regard.
 
At stock @ at around the £500 price for both.

1080p - 980ti
1440p - Matched
4k - Matched
4k Max detail - Fury x

At max overclock - unknown, but 980ti is overclocking very well.

@ £630 price point today - GTX 980ti G1 Gaming is a fantastic purchase but at over £100 more expensive than the Fury X.

Will i get over-taken by the Fury X with a few drivers, win10 & voltage unlock? - nobody really knows yet.
 
Furys priced fine imo, as Ti prices are going back up on Wednesday as far as i know, and if you want a one with an AIO cooler, its an extra £140.:)
 
Last edited:
980Ti seems to be the more balanced card, whilst Fury X flexes it's muscles at 4k and max details (but might get vRam limited at this point)

Windows 10/DX12 might turn everything around again, no-one quites knows for sure yet...
 
Swaying towards a fury because it's cool, quiet and powerful enough at 1440p(despite the hdmi 2 fail). Comparable 980ti with aio cooler is fair bit more cash(although it will be faster).
 
I went with the 980ti because of HDMI 2.0 support, 980ti is the faster card.

If I could find stock without price gouging I would buy a Fury for my 2nd rig to test for myself, more money than sense me :D
 
@OP
depends the monitor you have or looking to upgrade
Anyone who has gsync or freesync monitor stopped giving a dime abou how fast a card is. If it gets all the time more than the minimum fps needed for freesync or gsync to work, is irrelevant if one card gets 50 and the other 55.
And most of us who jump that wagon looking at the gtx780 or 290/290x smile and carry on for years to come.
Let the others spend on gfx upgrades every few months
 
I'd be tempted to hold on. With Windows 10 coming with DX 12, and give a little time for the Fury's driverset to mature a little, it'll give us a much better idea of what the card is capable of.
Judging something that is such a new technology straight out the gate is a bit premature to me.
 
Not really, it has yet to be over-clocked - if it's a dream or nightmare will remain to be seen once the third party devs have added the Fury X to the overclocking tools (MSI for example).

From the main developers working on MSI.

"It is not a question of "strange decision by AMD" at all. It is a question of very limited AMD ADL API. NVIDIA cards simply have unified GPIO/VID based voltage control functions inside NVAPI, so it is very easy and fast to support voltage control on new cards (within driver allowed voltage control range of course) or even provide voltage control for future cards without even seeing them.

It doesn't apply to AMD. To support voltage control on new cards developers first need to implement low-level I2C aceess support for each new GPI family (which can be troublesome for new GPU architecture), then provide support for each new voltage controller model. That's not the task that can be done without hardware."

We will know if a few weeks once he can get his hands on a card.
 
RavenXXX2 said:
The fact AMD have left so little headroom with stock volts does not bode well that the fury will be a great clocker.
Click to expand...
I agree, I'm a little pessimistic - but it's still an unknown.

It may be conservatives volts for base clock to keep it silent, but it most certainly has the headroom regarding power & heat - it would be very strange for it to over-clock like a pig (if that's the case, why on earth make it water-cooled by default when it already runs very cool).

Who knows, a few things which lead us both ways (negative & positive potentials!)
 
elmarko said:
Not really, it has yet to be over-clocked - if it's a dream or nightmare will remain to be seen once the third party devs have added the Fury X to the overclocking tools (MSI for example).

From the main developers working on MSI.

"It is not a question of "strange decision by AMD" at all. It is a question of very limited AMD ADL API. NVIDIA cards simply have unified GPIO/VID based voltage control functions inside NVAPI, so it is very easy and fast to support voltage control on new cards (within driver allowed voltage control range of course) or even provide voltage control for future cards without even seeing them.

It doesn't apply to AMD. To support voltage control on new cards developers first need to implement low-level I2C aceess support for each new GPI family (which can be troublesome for new GPU architecture), then provide support for each new voltage controller model. That's not the task that can be done without hardware."

We will know if a few weeks once he can get his hands on a card.
Click to expand...

Sill very misleading stating "its an overclockers dream" and then we find out you can't actually overclock them yet.

Typical AMD really :p
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom