• 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.

****Official OcUK Fury X Review Thread****

Starting to get the same impression, ordered the same:D haven't a clue sorry which drivers you should be using, i guess start with the latest from AMD first, i heard there's a modded windows 10 driver available but cant for the life of me find it.

Ha nice one, always liked Sapphire cards. I've seen Cat 15.6 pop up in graphic section, maybe that is the latest?
 
If it's built for 4K, isn't 4GB VRAM gonna prove to be an issue sooner or later?

They are hand tuning games so it won't be, apparently.

AMD is hand tuning games to ensure that 4GB will not hold back Fiji’s performance. Note that the graphics driver controls memory allocation, so its incorrect to assume that Game X needs Memory Y. Memory compression, buffer allocations, and caching architectures all impact a game’s memory footprint, and we are tuning to ensure 4GB will always be sufficient for 4K gaming.

Taken from HardOCP.
 
Last edited:
I put an order in for one of these at 13:02 and missed the boat. I'm disappointed "because new" but having seen the benchmarks cancelled the order. I can breathe easily that the 2 TXs in the main PC are not a joke though. Picked up a 390 at £260 for junior though "because new". I will always suffer from " because new" so can't be arsed to fight it.

I am sure I am not alone in suffering from this disease.
 
The AMD cards are overbuilt. They have prioritized 4K since Hawaii.

As the resolution increases, the GPU does more of the work. So when the GPU is pushing more at these resolutions, the bandwidth is greater on AMD cards. Look at it like a traffic jam, with Nvidia it's like there being four lanes jammed, with AMD it's 8 lanes so there is more getting through. This is just a rough and short explanation. GTX970/980 was on a 256bit interface vs the 512bit interface of the 290/290X, even the 280/280X is 384bit. In comparison, the 980Ti/Titan-X is using a 384bit interface. So I think in part this is the reason of Kaapstad's findings. I'm sure I've heard something about compression working better with Nvidia to make up for the shortcomings of their interface but I'm not exactly sure if that is true or not.

If I'm wrong or ill-informed about anything, I welcome correction.

If that is how it works then the only way to really get better performance at lower res then is a decent overclock on the core I imagine, so unless they unlock the voltage etc then it will always have an issue there.

Guess I may have to just wait a few months more to see how it matures and then make a decision to stay red or go green.

Like I say for me personally I want the best 1440p 27" solution
 
Huh?, oh fair enough about that I know its fun to join with a bit of trolling sometimes, but I wanted your opinion on the Fury X beating the Titan X in the benchy's I posted, you never actually commented just started talking about handbags and stuff. Oddly you have proved my point my really in that people get caught up in a train of thought and then don't see that the card is actually beating GM200 in some things.

If you don't want a sensible discussion then. Ok no worries. Take it easy :)

Sorry Boom, I misread your post. First of all, I'm incredibly cynical at this point as there are loads of factors which are potentially skewing results, both hardware driven and other reasons, so it's hard for me to tell. Like others here, I will await benchmarks from some of the guys here as I follow this forum a lot and trust most of the guys here more than random benchmarks from other sites.

I do see that it beats the TX in many benches but as I said, at this point, on day of release and with such new drivers, I can't form a concrete conclusion yet.

I am however following this thread all the time, so I'll be sure to come to a decision sooner or later ;)
 
Glad I was correct about your intentions Boom ;). The thing to realise here is perception, it matters not what people think, only what is and when you and Kaap have the card in your hands (machines) then we can see what is really going on. Also with driver releases and hopefully voltage control, it's another thing to be optimistic about so let people perceive what they want and try not let it derail your optimism as in a world full of glass half empty people, your stance is refreshing.

I look forward to your benchmarks and opinion.

Professional tech sites have already given their reviews. The Fury X trails the 980 Ti in most games.

The reviews are not 'perception', they are 'what is', as you put it.
 
Yeah that's what I think as well. I love Nvidia hardware but lately with drivers being iffy, and Gameworks frankly ruining a few games. I don't want an Nvidia only future. We need competition, to keep prices in check.

I don't get all the hate. These cards from AMD look decent. There at that 980 Ti / Titan X level which is what they needed.

Starting to think that maybe it's just an image thing. AMD can't shake it off.



Just one bud. Sapphire Fury X, coming tomorrow. I'm on Windows 8.1, do you know which driver I should be using?

The newest is i think are 15.200.1040

http://forums.guru3d.com/showthread.php?t=399956
 
Last edited:
Put the handbag away Boom, you got me all wrong. The point I was making was that we waited a bloody long time with no information whilst hyping it up, only to be presented with a product which doesn't meet our hopes (ie. not expectations). We all wanted this to be a TX smasher but we're a bit disappointed. That's what I meant ;)

It was never going to be a titan smasher, that was just wishful thinking by those with less understanding. The performance is generally as expected,
We have one more mythbuster to crack before 'Big Tonga' get's written off and that's how well it scales with more voltage than 1.22v.
 
Sorry Boom, I misread your post. First of all, I'm incredibly cynical at this point as there are loads of factors which are potentially skewing results, both hardware driven and other reasons, so it's hard for me to tell. Like others here, I will await benchmarks from some of the guys here as I follow this forum a lot and trust most of the guys here more than random benchmarks from other sites.

I do see that it beats the TX in many benches but as I said, at this point, on day of release and with such new drivers, I can't form a concrete conclusion yet.

I am however following this thread all the time, so I'll be sure to come to a decision sooner or later ;)

No worries mate, well being cynical in this hobby is probably wise. Nvidia said they had game ready drivers (Still no working since 350.12) and that Gameworks was great. AMD gave us Bulldozer and the 290X was hotter than a thousand suns. So I do get it.

With these Fiji cards I feel like AMD actually did good, and the hate is a bit unjustified. Kind of like AMD just can't win.

They addressed the heat / noise issues they had with 290X, now running at 50C and quiet. They massively improved performance per watt and trade blows with Nvidia's GM200.

Thinking that AMD might have an image problem that they just can't shake. Nvidia have the best marketing period. So I don't know how AMD get out of this situation lol.
 
Professional tech sites have already given their reviews. The Fury X trails the 980 Ti in most games.

The reviews are not 'perception', they are 'what is', as you put it.

It's people's perceptions I was mostly talking about but since you brought that up ......Professional tech sites with varied reviews......

As I've already mentioned more than once, I will wait for user reviews. Also voltage control might change things and new drivers have the possibility to increase performance so unless you have anything to prove otherwise, what exactly should I take from your reply?.
 
It's hard with AMD as you say due to previous problems, and let's be honest, the reference 290/x coolers looked like they were made on Blue Peter. They have indeed addressed many wrongs with this new series but it'll take a lot of hard work for their image to change.

I remember when the first Athlons came out. Intel was the nerd in the science lab and AMD were the bad boys tearing it up on their motorcycles. I miss those days :p
 

Nice one.

It's hard with AMD as you say due to previous problems, and let's be honest, the reference 290/x coolers looked like they were made on Blue Peter. They have indeed addressed many wrongs with this new series but it'll take a lot of hard work for their image to change.

I remember when the first Athlons came out. Intel was the nerd in the science lab and AMD were the bad boys tearing it up on their motorcycles. I miss those days :p

Ha, yeah like you say man they have started to rectify past mistakes. Maybe it will take a bit of time to turn things around. Nano and Fury (Non X) should be coming cheaper so might do some good for AMD.
 
It's hard with AMD as you say due to previous problems, and let's be honest, the reference 290/x coolers looked like they were made on Blue Peter. They have indeed addressed many wrongs with this new series but it'll take a lot of hard work for their image to change.

I remember when the first Athlons came out. Intel was the nerd in the science lab and AMD were the bad boys tearing it up on their motorcycles. I miss those days :p

you cant live in the past!
there comes a time when you no longer look cool in that leather jacket!
 
No worries mate, well being cynical in this hobby is probably wise. Nvidia said they had game ready drivers (Still no working since 350.12) and that Gameworks was great. AMD gave us Bulldozer and the 290X was hotter than a thousand suns. So I do get it.

With these Fiji cards I feel like AMD actually did good, and the hate is a bit unjustified. Kind of like AMD just can't win.

They addressed the heat / noise issues they had with 290X, now running at 50C and quiet. They massively improved performance per watt and trade blows with Nvidia's GM200.

Thinking that AMD might have an image problem that they just can't shake. Nvidia have the best marketing period. So I don't know how AMD get out of this situation lol.

Easy make a FASTER cheaper card with good drivers. Not hype. I guarantee if this card lived up to the hype all the green fan boys would.switch. They are always just matching or trading blows never market leaders. This card came out After the TX and 980ti.
 
Back
Top Bottom