Fury X Vs Titan X - Performance compared

[Gregster]

Added most of the comparison vids to the OP for easy reference and added a couple of others. Lots and lots of work went into this and thanks to everyone for the kind words and support. It really is appreciated.

 

[Dicehunter]

Thanks to your comparison you have saved my bank account £500, Definitely staying with the Titan X.

Here's hoping AMD's next GPU's are "Game Changing" as they claimed the Fury X would be.

 

[Insanties_birth]

Thanks to your comparison you have saved my bank account £500, Definitely staying with the Titan X.

Here's hoping AMD's next GPU's are "Game Changing" as they claimed the Fury X would be.

Don't know what everyone was expecting tbh, HBM is game changing but just needed more additional ram to truly convince people it was future proof. I've read a few reviews and even Greg (known Nvidia fan) has been surprised by the good performance, quiet noise leves and overall similarity it had to the TX. People were lapping up titan x cards at £200 more a piece and Nvidia only got out the 980ti as they was going to get slapped hard by the Fury and all of a sudden AMD are the bad guys not doing enough?

Every review I read I just jump to the conclusion and whether it be andandtech, tomshardware etc. they all have positive things to say but it seems the community refuses to listen to positives and rely only on false negatives. We've seen the fury can handle 4k and people still pretend it can't half the time. I'm going to personally wait for the next one with more than 4gb vram as I am not the kind of person who has enough cash to upgrade every single gen but even those that would upgrade in 2 months time still seem to be pretending it's not a good card overall. If you have a TX there was bound to be no reason to change though, unless you was expecting cards 2 or 3 hundred pounds cheaper to randomly be 20 or 30% more performance then there wouldn't be a need.

 

[Bazzards]

Expectatons were high probably because of forum users, however AMD chose not to release any info so these views were not dispelled for obvious reasons.

 

[VincentHanna]

We've seen the fury can handle 4k and people still pretend it can't half the time. I'm going to personally wait for the next one with more than 4gb vram

Haven't you just summed up exactly the issue? It might do fine in 4k benchmarking but it sounds like even you aren't convinced that 4GB VRAM is enough for future proofing?

HBM is the future, but 4GB is the past

Incidentally there are benchmarks built in to games that don't use anywhere near the sort of VRAM you see whilst actually playing, Shadows of Mordor is a good example of this.

 

[Lokken86]

Right it's got 4gb of memory. Moving on....

 

[Dicehunter]

Don't know what everyone was expecting tbh, HBM is game changing but just needed more additional ram to truly convince people it was future proof. I've read a few reviews and even Greg (known Nvidia fan) has been surprised by the good performance, quiet noise levels and overall similarity it had to the TX. People were lapping up titan x cards at £200 more a piece and Nvidia only got out the 980ti as they was going to get slapped hard by the Fury and all of a sudden AMD are the bad guys not doing enough?

Every review I read I just jump to the conclusion and whether it be anandtech, tom's hardware etc. they all have positive things to say but it seems the community refuses to listen to positives and rely only on false negatives. We've seen the fury can handle 4k and people still pretend it can't half the time. I'm going to personally wait for the next one with more than 4gb vram as I am not the kind of person who has enough cash to upgrade every single gen but even those that would upgrade in 2 months time still seem to be pretending it's not a good card overall. If you have a TX there was bound to be no reason to change though, unless you was expecting cards 2 or 3 hundred pounds cheaper to randomly be 20 or 30% more performance then there wouldn't be a need.

Expectations were high because AMD said it was to usher in a new era of gaming and this card would be the overclockers dream both of which turned out to be hot air.

I did have a Fury X pre-ordered with OCUK for later this month but after reading A LOT of reviews, Watching videos and watching Gregsters videos, Hearing a lot of negative things about coil whine and pump noise from friends in Europe, America and here in the UK so I ended up cancelling my order as I'm a little disappointed.

 

[ALXAndy]

Yo Greggy poos. Are you going to redo the tests at 4k when you get your new monitor matey?

I'm still undecided about Fury X or 980ti (pew pew).

 

[Mei]

id troll ppl and do it on a 4k tv

 

[VincentHanna]

Nowt wrong with those...

 

[uksoldierboy]

I was a bit MEH about the fury x, the performance is not far off the 980Ti, I just expected a little more, along with a better price.

As it stands now though I'm happy, mine aren't noisy imo, by no means distracting anyway, performance with two them is epic.

Not problems maxing my games out at 1440p, although GTA V is being a pain, seems the latest patch has screwed things up.

 

[Insanties_birth]

Expectations were high because AMD said it was to usher in a new era of gaming and this card would be the overclockers dream both of which turned out to be hot air.

I did have a Fury X pre-ordered with OCUK for later this month but after reading A LOT of reviews, Watching videos and watching Gregsters videos, Hearing a lot of negative things about coil whine and pump noise from friends in Europe, America and here in the UK so I ended up cancelling my order as I'm a little disappointed.

agreed it was hot air by the time of release but before that it was ample in my opinion. We had a card that could compete fairly with the tx, did better than the 980 and 970 in 4k and was priced reasonably. Although it IS the reality now that it's slightly under Nvidia's offering we have to keep in mind that is just a big joke on Nvidia fans that Nvidia was selling these as the TX just a month prior for an extra few hundred and it's only because they were forced to adjust that the 980ti came into play at all.

AMD did great at rebalancing the market, competing with Nvidia's even more expensive card and proved the new tech was viable for 4k and yet what do we get? Nvidia make a quick adjustment, beat them by 2 or 3% and have all the Nvidia fanboys acting like the Fury wasn't the only reason they're not being forced to pay nearly 1k for this level of performance. I'm not saying it's all rose and sunshine as the overclocking is a fair point but we should see voltage controls soon I hope so it's better to wait for that rather than pretend it's all doom and gloom based on current situation. I've heard as much about coil whine on 980's too (with exception of some like MSI version) but that seems to get brushed over often enough too. In truth they had a card that was matching titan performance just a month or two down the line at a much cheaper price point, that WAS amazing on a price to performance standpoint and it can't be denied. Nvidia basically released the 980ti to compete with that and people act as if AMD have done something wrong for being 2 or 3% behind. That is the same 2 or 3% you'd be paying £200 or £300 more for if Nvidia hadn't had such close competition. Next time when AMD have HBM with even more total Vram it's going to end the argument in my opnion.

 

[Insanties_birth]

Haven't you just summed up exactly the issue? It might do fine in 4k benchmarking but it sounds like even you aren't convinced that 4GB VRAM is enough for future proofing?

HBM is the future, but 4GB is the past

Incidentally there are benchmarks built in to games that don't use anywhere near the sort of VRAM you see whilst actually playing, Shadows of Mordor is a good example of this.

Not at all, I'm saying it could be an issue but it's actually been proven to be a none issue at this moment. Reviews show it works fine but it's not guaranteed to be perfect in the future, same with all cards. I'm waiting longer because I don't update my cards every year or two like some but my point was that the people who update every year or two wouldn't even notice this issue because they'll end up on a new card by the time it becomes a real issue anyway more than likely.

That's why I tend to read reviews and get peoples views on game performance rather than speculation. People saying 4gb is the past are just being childish, that's like saying only the 980ti and titan x exist as real viable cards and even the gtx 980 is already redundant. We're essentially dealing with an argument that says you must spend £500 on a graphics card and it can only be this graphics card or you're wrong ... essentially if vram is the only real decider then we should be kicking out the 980's and telling everyone to buy 390's for the 8gb ram when it comes to anyone buying cards less than 8gb ram as they must be trash due to vram? Somehow I'm guessing this argument is going to only work inversely in peoples minds though, it'll apply to GTX 980ti and up then the argument on vram will suddenly disappear for ALL other cards.

 

[mmj_uk]

Even AMD are saying that 8GB is beneficial with their 390X marketing, you can't promote 8GB against a 4GB GTX980 on one hand and then claim 4GB is enough for 4K on the other, not without losing credibility anyway.

4GB may or not be enough over the next few years (my opinion it won't be) but frankly when you're spending £500+ on a GPU why take the risk when there is a much safer 6GB option that performs better overall anyway?

 

[VincentHanna]

We're talking about flagship cards.

Of course 4GB is fine for 1080p, and probably always will be. It might even be enough for 1440p.

Things are (slowly) moving towards 4k though, and in that instance 4GB is not enough, not even in the near future.

When I say 4GB is the past, I mean that Nvidia and AMD won't release another flagship card with 4GB.

I didn't mean suddenly all the GPU's available with 4GB or less are pointless/worthless.

I've got a 4GB 980 GTX in my Mini ITX 'bedroom' PC and that is linked to a 55" 1080p Plasma. Can't see that being replaced anytime soon.

 

[Insanties_birth]

Even AMD are saying that 8GB is beneficial with their 390X marketing, you can't promote 8GB against a 4GB GTX980 on one hand and then claim 4GB is enough for 4K on the other, not without losing credibility anyway.

4GB may or not be enough over the next few years (my opinion it won't be) but frankly when you're spending £500+ on a GPU why take the risk when there is a much safer 6GB option that performs better overall anyway?

Of course you can. In a straight race of 4gb vs 8gb of the same type of memory it can help make a difference. In a race with different types of memory where HBM helps bridge that gap somewhat (even if not perfectly) then it works fine. We're seeing the fury able to do these 4k games that people said it couldn't yet they just put there heads in the sand and keep repeating 4gb so are we saying the 980 is redundant now due to the 8gb on 390 or not?

Remember it's ME saying that the vram isn't a huge issue which IS consistent in my argument for both the ti vs the fury and lower cards, it's everyone else seemingly using two faced logic to say we need the extra vram but when it comes to the 980 vs 290 just f*ck the logic we was saying and we refuse to say 390 is better. If your logic is why take the risk then the same applies to 390 vs 980, why take the risk? So is AMD currently top dog for any graphics card 980 below? I'm just trying to point out that people are using confirmation bias, we're clearly seeing people refuse to apply there own logic to other cards that are out and would probably end up recommending 980's to other people despite the 4gb vram they state is such an issue.

We're talking about flagship cards.

Of course 4GB is fine for 1080p, and probably always will be. It might even be enough for 1440p.

Things are (slowly) moving towards 4k though, and in that instance 4GB is not enough, not even in the near future.

When I say 4GB is the past, I mean that Nvidia and AMD won't release another flagship card with 4GB.

I didn't mean suddenly all the GPU's available with 4GB or less are pointless/worthless.

I've got a 4GB 980 GTX in my Mini ITX 'bedroom' PC and that is linked to a 55" 1080p Plasma. Can't see that being replaced anytime soon.

As stated, if 4gb is such a limit and you're clearly unsure about it's longevity in 1440p as well then we shouldn't be recommending the 980 as it could become redundant just as fast in some 1440p scenarios. According to the logic we're seeing on these boards we need to see more than 4gb so I'm following that to it's conclusion and stating the 980 is redundant to prove how silly the logic is as a counter point to this idea. It's simple, people could end up wanting to go SLI with the 980's and go for 4k / 1440p but with the current logic floating around we'd have to advise them to avoid it and go for the 390 it seems but people seem to ignore / dislike admitting that which shows the logic is purely and solely being used as confirmation bias, being used in specific contexts where it's refused to be applied elsewhere etc.

I agree 4gb is the past in that sense and they probably won't keep releasing 4gb cards for too long due to increasing need but people seem to ignore the benefit HBM brings in limiting that need somewhat while in the same vain refusing to acknowedge the argument over vram implications for any and all cards other than 980ti / fury. Still that leads us to the point then, 4gb is perfectly fine for what we have at the moment (when it's HBM which helps limit the need slightly) but short of clairvoyance and maybe 1 or 2 games I think we're all speculating on fairy dust right now. People looking to buy cards have no true indication they'll need more and I can understand there concern but still reiterate that these standards have to then be fairly applied to other cards like 980 gtx which are considered high end somewhat. That concern is no less for the 980 and below cards and at least the HBM helps somewhat. 980ti seems decent but if people are really that concerned then they may as well leave that card and wait to see what is offerred next anyway as AMD will prob have an 8gb 2nd series fury soon and the 6gb will be speculated as poor or too little.

 

[VincentHanna]

It's pretty easy to understand

If you are currently on UHD/4k, to buy a FLAGSHIP card (Not a 970/980/390 etc) with 4GB is a pointless risk when you can get a 980Ti that'll do the same job with extra VRAM should you need it.

Benchmarks might not show games using more than 4GB. But benchmarks aren't always indicative of actual gameplay and even if it's not an issue right now, there might be a game right around the corner that'll use significant amounts of VRAM.

There's a lot of releases leading up to Christmas for instance.

THIS DOES NOT MAKE OLDER CARDS DEFUNCT IN ANY WAY. 4GB is perfectly fine for 1080p and even 1440p

Is Fury X good? Yes
Is HBM the future? Yes
Would I recommend FuryX to someone on 4K? No.

 

[Lokken86]

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.

 

[Insanties_birth]

It's pretty easy to understand

If you are currently on UHD/4k, to buy a FLAGSHIP card (Not a 970/980/390 etc) with 4GB is a pointless risk when you can get a 980Ti that'll do the same job with extra VRAM should you need it.

Benchmarks might not show games using more than 4GB. But benchmarks aren't always indicative of actual gameplay and even if it's not an issue right now, there might be a game right around the corner that'll use significant amounts of VRAM.

There's a lot of releases leading up to Christmas for instance.

THIS DOES NOT MAKE OLDER CARDS DEFUNCT IN ANY WAY. 4GB is perfectly fine for 1080p and even 1440p

Is Fury X good? Yes
Is HBM the future? Yes
Would I recommend FuryX to someone on 4K? No.

And where is the clairvoyant mystics that will give me definitive proof that the 980ti's 6gb vram is going to be enough for the next wave of vram gobbling 4k games? There isn't one and as far as I'm concerned 6gb can be just as much as a small leap to where we need to be. If we're so concerned about Vram then I'd be more inclined to ignore the 980ti and wait for 8gb vram cards. HBM is proving to have a beneficial effect on vram usage so I'd be more inclined to wait for the next in the series of the fury cards with possibly 8gb vram and HBM for some major advantage in future proofing. If the argument is that within flagship cards that cost £500 we can't take risks then I think I'd rather wait till the conditions are actually right for 4k gaming rather than dive on the first offering of 6gb and potentially get stung along the way anyway.

I agree they are not defunct as of yet but the same argument can still apply to whether 4gb will be enough for future 1440p or 1080p titles as well as other games can use more vram regardless of 4k so we can't just put our fingers in our ears when the argument comes to those resolutions or the idea of modding which can use more vram too. My mindset is simple, if you are really concerned about vram then a 390x helps that at 1440p etc. and if you are really concerned for 4k then dont just jump on the first 6gb offering and act like your head being out of the water means there's guaranteed to be no waves that rise a little higher than that too. 6gb is a tiny bit safer than 4gb hbm but still not guaranteed either so the argument stands that we should be waiting for 8gb or 6gb HBM too then. We're either in a state where vram is a major concern and we need to ride out as many suggest to the point where 4gb is the past and companies are giving us the 8gb we need or we're buying based on the situation right now in which 4gb with hbm has had positive reviews.

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.

^

 

[VincentHanna]

And where is the clairvoyant mystics that will give me definitive proof that the 980ti's 6gb vram is going to be enough for the next wave of vram gobbling 4k games? There isn't one and as far as I'm concerned 6gb can be just as much as a small leap to where we need to be. If we're so concerned about Vram then I'd be more inclined to ignore the 980ti and wait for 8gb vram cards.

My mindset is simple, if you are really concerned about vram then a 390x helps that at 1440p etc. and if you are really concerned for 4k then dont just jump on the first 6gb offering and act like your head being out of the water means there's guaranteed to be no waves that rise a little higher than that too. 6gb is a tiny bit safer than 4gb

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