Fury X Vs Titan X - Performance compared

[Insanties_birth]

I bought Titan X's for 4k, so I don't need to worry about VRAM, period

That's cool, TX is another option for those so concerned with Vram

I know it's all just computer bits but I'm just wishing AMD will get a fair shake on it some day but I think both the 980ti and Fury x are great cards. If I had more money I'd have landed on one by now too but I'll be patient for the next set of cards truthfully. A tx is a good runner though, shouldn't need to worry for a bit with that card

 

[dave_beast]

HBM and DDR5 are completely different, its like comparing a fighter plane to an A380, just because its bigger, it doesn't necessarily make it better/faster.

 

[D.P.]

How many times has it to be argued. The 390x promotes 8gb of ram yea, but it needs it. It will use upwards of 5 or 6gb when the fury will be under 4gb.

Only because AMd are trying to pull resources out of vram to stop stuttering.

 

[D.P.]

HBM and DDR5 are completely different, its like comparing a fighter plane to an A380, just because its bigger, it doesn't necessarily make it better/faster.

A 1 gallon metal pale and 1 gallon plastic bucket are different devices to hold water but they both have the same capacity.


4Gb is 4GB, that doesn't suddenly manage to become 6 Gb however much marketing and PR spin you dowse over the slides. If you have a game with 5GB of assets to render a scene then the FuryX will be a slide show and the 980Ti will be smooth. That is just a plain fact

 

[Lokken86]

Only because AMd are trying to pull resources out of vram to stop stuttering.

Wrong its called compression.

 

[RavenXXX2]

Wrong its called compression.

nope

 

[D.P.]

Wrong its called compression.

I don't think you understand AMD"s marketing hen they talk about compression. Here's a hint, nvidia's Maxwell V2 actually get better compression ratios which is why the cards have no bandwidth limition on a 384bit GDDR5 interface.