• 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****

MR.B said:
I'm pretty ****** off. I've been waiting for Fury X for SO long. I've not played many games for months because of it. Now it arrives and it's not even matching the 980 Ti, and to top it off it's a paper launch. You can't actually buy one yet.

Fury X is good for 4K, but the 980 Ti is still generally faster at 4K.

Fury X will likely improve as drivers mature - but that's months of waiting. Forget it. I doubt it will outright beat the 980 Ti even with mature drivers anyway.

980 Ti overclocks better.

I can actually buy a 980 Ti right now.

And.. i just got one for just under £500. Deal.


If the Fury X was cheaper and available now i'd get it, because i prefer AMD as their cards have better image output, which is useful for my graphics/photo work. And i don't mean 3D related stuff, i mean general image output. Whites are whiter/brighter and colours more vibrant, yet not saturated. It's something you'll only really notice on a high-end 10-bit IPS monitor (1 billion+ colours). There's no way to get a NV card to match it by messing around with options, either within software or on the monitor. Believe me, i've tried countless times over the years.

However i've not used a NV card since the 500 series, so maybe this issue no longer exists but i doubt it. I'll just have to live with it i guess.
Click to expand...
Or you could have got the Fury which will be much cheaper and be available in actual numbers on the 14th?

I doubt its going to be much slower.

Shrugs.
 
I can't help but feel people are over reacting here, I think the long wait and AMD marketing had us thinking we were getting a titan killer which was never going to be the case, but when I see people saying it's getting thrashed by the 980ti or AMD are finished that's over the top, after reading and watching a lot of reviews for the most part the fps difference between fury x and 980ti is single digits (although a lot of different reviews vary) hopefully AMDs driver department will pull there socks up soon and release regular new drivers to close the gap. And as for the poor overclocking I'm sure the card will be unlocked soon as why would they over speck the cooler and have dual bios switch if it wasn't meant to do decent overclocking. Hopefully it will be sub £500 soon to make it look a bit better value
 
i knew it wouldn't beat a TX, u could tell by the specs and the HBM wouldn't add much more performance...

now the question is do i buy one which as for full DX12 but lower performance or keep 290x cf and just replace the faulty card i have?
 
I think the way the launch was handled and even the current pricing needs to be criticised since AMD PR and marketing screwed it up and they need a kick up the arse. In its current shape it should have been £450 and if there are driver issues it should have not been launched yet - its as simple as that.

Yet we have cheaper Fury being released on the 14th which should not be much slower than Fury and probably closer to £400 to £450 unless AMD screw that up too.

This is why some of the E-PEEN hysteria is getting ridiculous especially when it's mostly coming from people who probably have half decent rigs already.

They should try looking at the sub £200 arena. It's totally rubbish with the GTX960 and R9 285/R9 380.

Hardly a progression in any way and full of rebranded and sidegrade cards.

Many of us have been waiting years for decent upgrades in that tier and its not happening unless we spend massively more money what we did for a similar performance increase from stuff we bought years ago.

I hate 28nm with a passion now.

It's all the fault of the subpar fab,TSMC.
 
Last edited:
Final8y said:
I totally disagree.
Click to expand...

I respect your opinion. But I'm stating that as fact. Just look at last years updates and fix's, now look at this year.

I based my purchase on the great support of last year. And now I feel let down.
And now AMD will split the company god knows what's going to happen.
 
deuse said:
I respect your opinion. But I'm stating that as fact. Just look at last years updates and fix's, now look at this year.
Click to expand...

Lol makes me laugh when people say things like this. You can make as many statements of facts as you like but it wont reflect everyone's experiences. I Havant had any AMD driver issues for a few years.
 
Ok yes interesting, as previous posted pointed out, the test rigs are slightly different across the sites.

GURU3D Review - Core i7 5960X (Haswell-E) @ 4.4 GHz on all eight cores
HardOCP Review - Core i7 3770k @ 4.8 GHZ
TechReport - Core i7-5960X (stock)
Hexus - Intel Core i7-4770K (quad-core, overclocked up to 4.40GHz)

Now, out of this lot it appears the Guru3D and Hexus reviews are the most favourable in terms of data. Thus, we see the mooted 54% boost over a 290X. You can cut and slice the other performance data all you like but we know that this game has a decent engine, a good bench and that the drivers are decent. It will be interesting to see what happens when it gets placed into a Hex or Octo core rig running at 4.8GHZ.

 
Last edited:
Whilst I think the price is a bit high, why do people keep ignoring the fact that it has an AIO cooler, which clearly adds more to the cost than a standard heatsink...?
 
Kaapstad said:
Just had a thought

Does anyone think the poor showing of HBM @1080p is down to the low clockspeed it uses ?

What I mean by this is with it's very wide bus it is ideal for 2160p where the fps are lower but for 1080p most of the bus is not getting used but the clockspeed is more important as the fps are higher.
Click to expand...

But this is AMD's issue, all their top cards now, even the 390 and 390x as they have slapped 8gb of vram on them seem to be marketed for 4k....but 4k is such a small share of the market at the moment they are missing the fact that Nvidia's entire range acorss the board beats them where it matters, ie at 1080p. This isn't to mention even that even the Fury X cant hold decent frames in a lot of the latest titles at 4k anyway so you need at least 2 of them....again a niche market share.

If AMD want market share and want to make some money they need to shift their focus off 4k.
 
Last edited:
Avenged7Fold said:
Lol makes me laugh when people say things like this. You can make as many statements of facts as you like but it wont reflect everyone's experiences. I Havant had any AMD driver issues for a few years.
Click to expand...

So you're saying we have had more driver updates and fix's this year then last? that would be a no.

Not many people have NV driver issues but when they do all hell breaks lose.
I'm talking about support.
 
deuse said:
Elite CF is giving you the one finger ;)
Oh sorry they went to NV who had SLI :)
Click to expand...

Sorry but when your whole argument comes down to one game and Mutli GPU for that game then your point is lost.
I dont play Elite so im not experiencing your issues and in the games i play AMD drivers has been great.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom