• 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****

I noticed the other site people was scaning is now showing stock again with higher price. Hope i still get mine for the £520. Tho closer to £530 with postage
 
Freddie1980 said:
AMD needed the power savings that HBM brought, just a look at how much power the 290X/390X draws without a new process shrink AMD had nowhere to go.

The Fury also shows the differences between the R&D teams at AMD and Nvidia (and maybe budget/money as well). Nvidia have been able to get two brand new architecture designs out on 28nm whereas AMD have been stuck with GNC since 2011 which was behind Kepler in terms of efficiency to start with.
Click to expand...

Not quite so. Pitcairn matched kepler. The iterative approach with GCN does not deliver quite the same headline effect for arch updates. But yes it's not quite as hoped, thought it would decisively match the 980ti/TX, particularly at 1440p -> 2160p.

LoadsaMoney said:
Reviews are all over the place.
Click to expand...

Yup hard to tell where it sits exactly.
 
Freddie1980 said:
I'm in the same boat, I'm and ATI fan not an AMD fan but AMD gets some business out of my because I like the cards that ATI used to produce and would like to replace my GTX670 with AMD card but frankly they have disappointed/underwhelmed me with EVERY new release since the 7970.

Someone at AMD needs realise performance sells and being 2nd on the benchmark graphs is akin to winning the 100m Spint silver medal at the Olympics i.e. nobody can remembers that persons name.
Click to expand...

Well,even at the lower end,they didn't even release a fully enabled Tonga and just rejigged the R9 285. A fully enabled Tonga would have given the GTX960 some better competition. ATM,we end up having a meh set of options under £200.
 
i think it will get better with drivers
the windows 10 drivers are looking pretty sweet apparently

you shouldnt buy a card in the hope it gets better with drivers tho lol
 
Quoting humbug from locked thread.

humbug said:
You have to look at it in the round tho Boom, not just cherry picked games.
Its a £550 4GB card.

The 980 is a £380 4GB card and within 15% of Fury-X, the 390X is a much stronger competitor to the 980 than Fury is to the 980TI.

Fury-X is a competitor to the 980, it is faster but its going on £200 more expensive.
Click to expand...

Nice to see even an AMD fanboy can see it how it is.

A lot of people going on the defensive saying just wait for drivers, but it runs cooler, it does this it does that. At the end of the day it hasn't turned out how most people expected, if the card wasn't ready because of drivers and what not it should have been delayed and would have looked far better launching in a position where it beat the 980ti outright.
 
humbug said:
Its 15% to 25% faster than Hawaii XT, get a 390X and overclock it, bang there you go 8GB Fury-X

15%, i don't get it, the card is performing way under its 4096 Shaders, whats HBM doing?
Click to expand...

I don't like the way TPU are showing additional average performance figures without WoW/PC (games that favour Nvidia) that's pretty shoddy/biased reviewing. They should have balanced it by also removing the scores for Batman/Metro (which penalise Nvidia).

Was quite surprised really as I have always liked TPU :(
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom