Man of Honour
I used Shadow of Mordor as it was one of the games you posted in the first place lol.
Last edited:
-
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?
- Thread starter FuryXGuy
- Start date
I used Shadow of Mordor as it was one of the games you posted in the first place lol.
Man of Honour
It would have to be a really bad ASIC to not boost over 1200mhz @stock lol.
Even the reference card which is about as slow as you can get will boost over 1200mhz @stock.
You need to get your facts right and stop making them up.
As I said earlier if you post some of your own results with a Fury X you may be taken more seriously.
Last edited:
So crossfire Fury Xs (and by extension Nanos) basically fall over as soon as VRAM use exceeds the 4GB mark?
Thanks Kaap, you just saved me some pain.
Man of Honour
I know the cards have only got 4gb of VRAM but I think you can go a bit further before they struggle, if I had to guess it would be around 5.5gb.
Annnnnd then you set me right back where I was lol.
Seriously though, I find your feedback on these niche multicard setups invaluable. Thanks!
Man of Honour
Here is Shadow of Mordor memory usage running on the TXs maxed @2160p.
If you use a single Fury X at the same settings it will run and is very smooth. If you try and run 2 or more in CF it turns into a slide show where the memory tanks.
With older drivers you could run quadfired Fury Xs at these settings but it would be useless for gaming as the averages were good but the minimums were awful.
I have not tried playing the game itself but people who have say the memory usage is even higher than in the benchmark I used.
Last edited:
Just some input here, i don't own a fury x however since upgrading from my 290x to a 980Ti i have noticed in games using the same settings the memory usage on my 980Ti is more than what my 290x ever got. In GTA 5 i would get around 3 - 3.4GB of usage however now its jumped a extra GB of usage using my 980Ti. Id take memory usage with a pinch of salt.
It's not nessarily what the game needs but rather what the games not needing? For example same settings on GTA 5 on 1080p gets 3.4GB of usage and can run all day long at 60FPS capped on the 290x, however on my 980TI capped at 60FPS it will use about 4GB of data on same settings. To me it's just because the card has a bigger memory buffer it's not flushing it as frequently as it can hold more data while cards with lower memory will flush the memory buffer to get rid of data it doesn't need to hold at that time.
Now i do believe where it doesn't need to flush the memory buffer as frequently you will find much smooth gameplay but this memory usage i'm seeing in games is nonsense atm.
It's not nessarily what the game needs but rather what the games not needing? For example same settings on GTA 5 on 1080p gets 3.4GB of usage and can run all day long at 60FPS capped on the 290x, however on my 980TI capped at 60FPS it will use about 4GB of data on same settings. To me it's just because the card has a bigger memory buffer it's not flushing it as frequently as it can hold more data while cards with lower memory will flush the memory buffer to get rid of data it doesn't need to hold at that time.
Now i do believe where it doesn't need to flush the memory buffer as frequently you will find much smooth gameplay but this memory usage i'm seeing in games is nonsense atm.
So exceeding the 4GB on a single Fury is OK, but crossfire with the same settings is a problem? Odd. Maybe whatever magic they use to get around the 4GB cap doesn't work in crossfire? That'd be kind of absurd though as that's where it is needed most.
I recently fried a 980TI so I'm weighing up various options, but I don't have an unlimited budget. Nanos seem to be a good price at the moment so I could get 2 or 3 of those (over time), but I'd be locked in for a while and I don't want to hobble myself.
I do have a 290 at the moment, so slumming it at 1080p until Polaris comes along isn't out of the question. Hard to guess if wave 1 polaris will be a better deal than Nanos.
I recently fried a 980TI so I'm weighing up various options, but I don't have an unlimited budget. Nanos seem to be a good price at the moment so I could get 2 or 3 of those (over time), but I'd be locked in for a while and I don't want to hobble myself.
I do have a 290 at the moment, so slumming it at 1080p until Polaris comes along isn't out of the question. Hard to guess if wave 1 polaris will be a better deal than Nanos.
not all cards can push enough performance for the memory they carry, as it would be useless for a 750Ti to have 8Go memory, because it cannot push performance high enough to use that memory, you will be taking screenshots at 4k
the same apply for the Fury, a single card can push performance to the limit of the memory, to run out of memory you most often have fps lower than 30, but crossfire you get a lot of horse power where you get 40-60 fps at 4K, but the 4Go isnt enough so you would have to lower the settings, thats why i think Fury doesnt have enough memory for crossfire, because it does have the power, but thats not true for all games though,the majority would be just fine, although, more games released lately seem to be more demanding on memory than what used to be released last year.
Man of Honour
I would hang onto the 290 until Polaris or Pascal is available.
A Nano is not a huge step up in performance from the 290.
Why do you have two 980 Ti's and two Fury X's? You have two swooped up Gaming Rigs?
Have you tried Rise of the Tomb Raider all maxed out with Very High textures in a single Fury X (with FXAA is fine I don't need SMAA) at 1440P? I read on HardOCP that they were able to max it out despite it needing 4GB for Very High Texture settings because it uses System RAM for the rest of the 1 - 2GB of memory that is needed.
Last edited:
Man of Honour
At the moment the Fury X runs very poorly even @1080 with ROTTR maxed out. I suspect this is a problem with the game devs/AMD drivers as other 4gb cards like the GTX 980 and 290X can run it quite well @1080p.
I have a few more cards than that lol. Apart from the obvious that I use them for gaming I do use them for other things.
One of the things I use them for is benching them myself to see how they really stack up. This is a lot more interesting and fun doing something practical than it is to read some of the threads on these forums where people argue about theoretical stuff that is often rubbish.
Practical trumps theoretical every time.