• 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.

Possible Radeon 390X / 390 and 380X Spec / Benchmark (do not hotlink images!!!!!!)

Status
Not open for further replies.
Kaapstad said:
They are onto a winner as it is cheaper and quieter than a TX with performance that will be quite close.
Click to expand...

Yeah I guess thats true too.

I'm due a bit of pay backdated at work which equates to about £500 so I think the Fury might be my most flamboyant PC purchase in a decade. Good timing I guess!

I also think the Nano reveal was a masterstroke. That opens up some great oppurtunities for people to make really cool gaming boxes. There is definitely a market for them.
 
Really liking this one,

c7sKsQq.jpg
 
wunkley said:
This thread is reaching fever pitch levels of drivel now. After watching that frankly ares crawling presentation, we are still none the wiser as the Info we want regarding actual performance just wasn't provided.

Benchmarks required.
Click to expand...

No we just got specs, price, release date of the whole line up :confused:

Benchmarks come with reviews. You wouldn't trust AMD's own benchmarks anyway?
 
r7slayer said:
Also i am now seeing the usual nvidia peeps starting to post now trying to play things down. Haha was so so quiet during the video.
Click to expand...

You could turn that around and say the usual AMD boys hyping things up. Actual gaming performance wasn't shown and people are writing off the TX and 980ti lol.

I know which one looks more stupid.
 
Greebo said:
Titan x only does 26 fps on Tomb Raider at ultra details on 4k. If the fury x does 60 fps then AMD have nailed it
Click to expand...

Here are some ultra scores for the 290X and TX

You need a lot more than a 50% increase in performance from the AMD card to match a TX.

Kaapstad said:
5U3Yocv.jpg



2160p

1 GPU

  1. Score 26.5, Min 18.3, GPU TitanX @1435/2002, CPU 5960X @4.0, Kaapstad Link 347.88 Drivers
  2. Score 20.1, Min 14.2, GPU 980 @1502/2102, CPU 5960X @4.5, Kaapstad Link 347.52 Drivers
  3. Score 16.7, Min 12.8, GPU 295X2 @1190/1625, CPU 5960X @4.9, AMDMatt Link 14.12 Drivers


2 GPUs

  1. Score 39.8, Min 28.0, GPU 980 @1502/2052, CPU 5960X @4.5, Kaapstad Link 347.52 Drivers
  2. Score 36.4, Min 25.2, GPU 980 @1452/1951, CPU 5960X @4.3, Thesnipergecko Link 347.52 Drivers
  3. Score 33.1, Min 20.0, GPU 295X2 @1190/1625, CPU 5960X @4.9, AMDMatt Link 14.12 Drivers


3 GPUs

  1. Score 57.9, Min 40.0, GPU 980 @1502/2002, CPU 5960X @4.5, Kaapstad Link 347.52 Drivers


4 GPUs

  1. Score 103.1, Min 74.0, GPU TitanX @1405/2002, CPU 5960X @4.0, Kaapstad Link 347.88 Drivers
  2. Score 85.0, Min 52.4, GPU 980 @1550/2010, CPU 3930k @4.9, Besty Link 347.52 Drivers
  3. Score 75.8, Min 54.0, GPU 980 @1492/2002, CPU 5960X @4.5, Kaapstad Link 347.52 Drivers
  4. Score 64.0, Min 22.0, GPU 295X2 @1190/1625, CPU 5960X @4.9, AMDMatt Link 14.12 Drivers
Click to expand...
 
r7slayer said:
Also i am now seeing the usual nvidia peeps starting to post now trying to play things down. Haha was so so quiet during the video.
Click to expand...

We are seeing the usual AMD fanboys wetting themselves at AMD PR.

1.5X the efficiency of the 290x is not that impressive at all, nor is 4GB VRAM, or the fact that it is less powerful than a TX .

But never let facts get in the way of a good masturbation.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom