• 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.

Poll: Fury X Owners. Would you buy the Fury X again if you could do it all over again?

With hindsight, would you buy the Fury / Fury X again?

  • Yes, I would.

    Votes: 31 36.0%

  • No, I wouldn't.

    Votes: 55 64.0%
  • Total voters
    86
I voted yes. I paid the same for a brand new Sapphire Fury as it would have cost for one of the cheapest 980s. At the time and moreso now it outperforms the 980 in games, especially as I have an eye on moving to either QHD or 4k soon. At least 50% of my use is opencl work for which AMD architectures have generally been better and I certainly have no complaints with the Fury. The card is quiet and I have had no driver problems apart from the "bouncing clocks issue" which was sorted with a new driver for me.

Until recently I always paid around the £150-200 mark for GPUs so have tended towards AMD in the past as they were generally better in that price bracket. This was my first high end card and I haven't been disappointed.
 
Last edited:
Kaapstad said:
In the memory stakes the GM 200 cards totally thrash the fury X. It was a huge mistake for AMD to use HBM1 @500mhz.

Mhz is more important than bandwidth most of the time. Fortunately HBM2 will address the Mhz problem.

The Fury X is a good card but why are you pushing it so hard, what is your angle ?
Click to expand...
You keep going on about the memory frequency, GPU's are optimized for bandwidth and HBM gives more at lower power. Most games are not bandwidth limited unless the user is running at high resolution/frequency which is why the gains are not big at 1080p.
 
bought a fury tri x as im now tied into freesync, im happy enough with it as it does the job its meant to do without any fuss, sure there are faster gpus but as long as its fast enough then so what, i cant remember the last time i ran a benchmark and the whole frames per second thing just does not interest me anymore, if game run well and look good then happy days
 
FuryXGuy said:
Anyone what to take a stab at this question?

The Fury X has 176 GB/S more bandwidth than the 980 Ti but it doesn't pull away from the 980 Ti buy a significant margin. I found that a bit shocking to be honest.

I was thinking that with Fury X's higher bandwidth memory it would have easily beat the 980 Ti.

I was thinking this would be a repeat of the HD 4870 when it launched with the World's First GDDR5 RAM. It beat the GTX 260 on average which had a memory bandwidth of around 111 Gb/s vs 115GB/s of the HD 4870 and it even beat the GTX 280 in some games while it cost's $100 less than the GTX 260 and almost half the cost of a GTX 280 when it launched.

I was totally floored by the price/performance of the HD 4870 and brought my first ATI card!

Given the specs of the Fury X with it's insane 176GB/s bandwidth advantage and 4096 Bit bus, shouldn't it have demolished the 980 Ti. I know there are architectural differences between the two GPU's and memory bandwidth shouldn't be the only factor in performance but still. On paper the hardware of the Fury X looks vastly superior but it doesn't blow away the 980 Ti in terms of performance.

You guys think it's a driver issue or something?
Click to expand...

The 980TI is simply not starved of memory bandwidth. You can test this easily by over clocking the memory you get much less performance increase than increasing the core.
Part is this may be that Nvidia have superior memory compression and managent.
 
D.P. said:
The 980TI is simply not starved of memory bandwidth. You can test this easily by over clocking the memory you get much less performance increase than increasing the core.
Part is this may be that Nvidia have superior memory compression and managent.
Click to expand...

This is one of the reasons why the memory bandwidth wouldn't make a massive difference in comparison to the Hawaii cards which had more than enough anyway.
 
FredFlint said:
You keep going on about the memory frequency, GPU's are optimized for bandwidth and HBM gives more at lower power. Most games are not bandwidth limited unless the user is running at high resolution/frequency which is why the gains are not big at 1080p.
Click to expand...

1080p performance needs Mhz and that is something that HBM1 does not have.

8 Pack has proved when benching a Fury Pro card on LN2 that HBM1 performs noticeably better when overclocked a lot. Or putting it another way under normal use it is Mhz limited.
 
Kaapstad said:
1080p performance needs Mhz and that is something that HBM1 does not have.

8 Pack has proved when benching a Fury Pro card on LN2 that HBM1 performs noticeably better when overclocked a lot. Or putting it another way under normal use it is Mhz limited.
Click to expand...

If you overclock any memory a lot it will perform a lot better, its no revelation.
 
Kaapstad said:
1080p performance needs Mhz and that is something that HBM1 does not have.

8 Pack has proved when benching a Fury Pro card on LN2 that HBM1 performs noticeably better when overclocked a lot. Or putting it another way under normal use it is Mhz limited.
Click to expand...

Sadly LN2 seems to be the only way you can get enough of an overclock on HBM for it to make a decent difference so like you say in normal everyday use it has no relevance, And I'm sure LN2 overclockers are not the market AMD needs to be targeting to generate sales.

Personally I think that for most of us the Fury X and Fury pro would have been better products if they'd used GDDR5.
 
Polls is now utterly worthless. I answered no to purchasing a Fury X but would have answered yes to purchasing a Fury.
 
No, reasons =

- Only 4GB VRAM vs 6 for the 980Ti

- Mine can only overclock reliably about 5% vs 30% (?) 980Ti
I dont even bother ocing it whereas I did with my old nvidia card

- Not optimized for high framerates

- Mine have a bug where something the display output becomes corrupted
and the cable must be replugged to fix it, this happens maybe once a week,
sometimes more, sometimes several times in the same day

- not fully compatible with some software resulting in abysmal performance
 
ICDP said:
Polls is now utterly worthless. I answered no to purchasing a Fury X but would have answered yes to purchasing a Fury.
Click to expand...

Poll is now utterly worthless because its anonymous, anyone can vote when its meant to be for people who have/had one.
 
Last edited:
Ash0787 said:
No, reasons =

- Only 4GB VRAM vs 6 for the 980Ti

- Mine can only overclock reliably about 5% vs 30% (?) 980Ti
I dont even bother ocing it whereas I did with my old nvidia card

- Not optimized for high framerates

- Mine have a bug where something the display output becomes corrupted
and the cable must be replugged to fix it, this happens maybe once a week,
sometimes more, sometimes several times in the same day

- not fully compatible with some software resulting in abysmal performance
Click to expand...

All your points are valid but to clarify your question, the 980Ti does not overclock by 30%. Don't take the base or even published boost clocks, use the actual stock boost clocks. For example my 980Ti ACX 2.0 would boost to 1304 core clock at stock and would overclock stable at 1520. So actual overclock was/is 16.56% or ~15% actual linear performance with VRAM OC. Stock reference 980Ti would also get normal boost clocks of ~1275-1300 but it will drop to ~1200-1215 core after prolonged usage. Though this can be reduced with aggressive fan profiles.

I do agree that R9 Fury are generally woeful overclockers.
 
Last edited:
They are also still too expensive, seeing £500 new for the same model as I have on this shop.

I'd be tempted to get another one second hand if people were selling them for around £300, but that doesn't seem to be happening because the new price is still quite high and I guess there are still not a lot of these cards out there
 
I thought the Fury X was supposed to be as fast or very close to the 980 Ti? It's interesting to see AMD users themselves place far less value on this card than the 980 Tis price point.
 
Mayh3M said:
I thought the Fury X was supposed to be as fast or very close to the 980 Ti? It's interesting to see AMD users themselves place far less value on this card than the 980 Tis price point.
Click to expand...

It is as fast or close to the 980 Ti. But in my opinion it needed to be cheaper to make it more attractive due to the fact that you can get an overclocked 980 Ti's for slightly more and there aren't overclocked Fury X's to counter that and also it has two more GB's than the Fury X, so AMD needed to lower the price to make it more attractive. So, if it's selling for $650 and an overclocked 980 Ti is also going for the same price or slightly more one can see why someone would choose the 980 Ti over the Fury X.

The launch price would have been justified if the Fury X had beaten the 980 Ti by more than a couple of percent.

Also, the drivers didn't show the full potential of the Fury X at launch if you look at the newer drivers the performance is much better against the 980 Ti now than when it launched.

I brought when it was $50 - $60 cheaper than the 980 Ti and what do you know on newegg when the price was cut it all got sold out.

You have no complaints from me as I like the Fury X at the price I brought and having seen the card in person with it's sleek design and the Radeon logo light up which looks sweet in a see through case plus it's liquid cool at $50 - $60 cheaper than the 980 Ti it was a no brainer to choose the Fury X over the 980 Ti given that you can get as much performance if not better than the 980 Ti with the new drivers.
 
Went from a 7870 to a Fury X back in october and I couldn't be happier!

My PC's last me, in general, 3-4 years and this duration will only get larger as Intel's CPU updates get more and more incremental.
The only thing I would probably upgrade in the next 4-5 years will be the SSD's and maybe the Fury if we see another leap in performance like the one I got from that upgrade.

Would I buy one now? Probably not, it's just getting a bit too close to the release of new architectures.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom