• 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.
r7slayer said:
are the titan x and 980ti next to the same performance yet there is a steep price difference? probably just for the extra 6gb. AMD probably priced it at 980ti as not many people will consider the titan x now over the 980ti. Makes sense to me as the 980ti is more competitive with its lower price.
Click to expand...

If the FuryX was faster than the 980Ti they could have easily charged more, and they could have made the powerful claim of having hr fastest GPU in history. But they didn't.

Only reviews will tell us for sure but I'm expecting 980Ti performance, slightly similar power consumption. Some games might really do much better on the FuryX architecture but others will do better on the 980Ti and TX, especially ocne you use 4GB of VRAM.
 
Gibbo said:
Yes 390X is faster for sure, coolers improved, quieter and around 5-10% boost over old reference 290X, purely due to increased clock speeds.

But those who got 290X 8GB from OcUK at 299 or 4 GB at 209.99 will be laughing because as I warned months ago 390 series are more expensive but the prices are where they should be. The 290X at the prices I did was giving them away but they were selling at 100+ a day at the crazy prices we did a few weeks back.
Click to expand...

Hi Gibbo
Is it safe to say we should be getting these R9 290X ROG Matrix https://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=GX-363-AS&groupid=701&catid=56&subcat=1752 before they are gone?
 
So I was a big believer of the FuryX and HBM, but not showing any benchmarks is kinda upsetting and a bit off. I was more impressed with the FuryX2 announcement and the mostly the Nano.

The Nano at that size and power is a Mini ITX builders dream come true!
 
wunkley said:
Calm down Lynne. Calm down Lynne. You've got minor women's whiplash

/Alan

Right, there are no benchmarks yet. The live reveal show was awful. I watched it and crawled up my own arse for most of it. The 'facts' about actual performance were pathetic. A mumbled error led 'tombraider running at 4k' a mumbled non descript game running at 5k. Totally. Totally Uselless info.

And why is no one mentioning the Fury is only 4GB? Genuine question. A year ago 8GB was the new 'minimum' for 4k. According to many on here
Click to expand...


People are mentioning it, have been mentioning it for weeks. We are just taken in by the hype/potential performance.
 
xibinim said:
Without scrolling through 50 pages since this morning, there should be an official thread/updated OP, what's the crack?
Click to expand...

AMD's main points so far

R7 360 - Entry level aimed at online games priced at $109 with 2 GB GDDR5
R7 370 - Offers more performance and comes with 4GB GDDR5 at $149
Both Cards DX12 compatible
R9 380 - $199
R9 390 - $329 with 8GB GDDR5
R9 390X - $429 also 8GB GDDR
All cards available above available on Thursday 18th June. No word on fury yet. Now they are talking about DX12
Footage of the new fable talking about the new features of Directx 12 with Lionhead.
Fable beta coming soon to windows 10. Can sign up on the fable website.
Stardock + Oxide studios talking about Ashes of the Singularity and about how DX12 allows bigger battles.
Talking about VR now.
Oculus and CCP guests on stage are now talking about the technical side of VR.
Multiple GPUs with LiquidVR doesn't add latency to rendering.
Specs req for VR is important. R9 290 and above is their recommendations.
Talking about EVE: Valkyrie and how it works with VR. Releasing Q1 2016.
GE guest on stage talking about non gaming implications of VR.
Chris Hook on stage about to announce something
Showing project Quantum which is a very small pc and has two Fiji processors.
Video showing development of Fiji and HBM. Talking about liquid cooling with high performance and memory bandwidth.
Dr. Lisa su on stage "to introduce the worlds fastest GPU"
R9 Fury X. Watercooled and showing it running sniper elite and tomb raider at 5k.
1.5x pref to watt of r9 290x.
R9 Fury none watercooled version in stores shortly.
R9 Nano just announced too. 6" GPU with fiji chip with 2 x preformance per watt of 290x. "double the power of r9 290x"
R9 Nano available this summer with other cards in the family.
Bringing AMD staff on stage to talk about the new GPUs
Fury x - 4096 stream processors, 8.6 Tflops and 8.9 billion transistors
Talking about how they offer they will offer the best 4k Experience
Now talking about HBM and making the card more power efficient. 3x the performance per watt of GDDR5. 94% less PCB surface.
Talking about how the future of VR and the massive power requirements it has. 16k resolution per eye, 120-240hz refresh rate and GPU engine requires 1 Peta flop.
Talking about fury series again and about the build quality.
VU meter showing GPU load in real time.
24th June fury X $649. July 14th Fury $549 and R9 nano later in summer and dual fiji gpu in the fall.
 
D.P. said:
If the FuryX was faster than the 980Ti they could have easily charged more, and they could have made the powerful claim of having hr fastest GPU in history. But they didn't.

Only reviews will tell us for sure but I'm expecting 980Ti performance, slightly similar power consumption. Some games might really do much better on the FuryX architecture but others will do better on the 980Ti and TX, especially ocne you use 4GB of VRAM.
Click to expand...

Agree with all of this.
 
D.P. said:
If it was as fast as TItan X they would have said so and they would have priced it closer to the titan X price.

The fact is they chose the 980Ti price point, and from the announcement of power efficiency changes we can assume it is around 980Ti performance. They would have had to make bugger improvements to over take the TX.


There is a big price gap between the 980Ti and Titan X yet AMD choice to meet the 980Ti pricing, why?
Click to expand...

Are you for real? The ti is literally titan x speed, now all of a sudden you're trying to spin it that because of price point this card competes with the ti but not the titan x? Newsflash, if it competes with the ti its also up there with titan x in performance terms, the vast majority of review sites have basically said the ti is a titan x with less ram, now it seems like you're trying to reverse that position.
 
spikerules said:
So I was a big believer of the FuryX and HBM, but not showing any benchmarks is kinda upsetting and a bit off. I was more impressed with the FuryX2 announcement and the mostly the Nano.

The Nano at that size and power is a Mini ITX builders dream come true!
Click to expand...

The Fursy X2 and the Nano are clealy the most interesting cards and soemthign Nvidia wont be able to do much about. OK they might squeeze a dual 980Ti but AMD have a big advantage with HBM memory.

My concern with the FuryX2 is each core will only get 4GB which will make it kind of useless for many purposes.
 
Gerard said:
Are you for real? The ti is literally titan x speed, now all of a sudden you're trying to spin it that because of price point this card competes with the ti but not the titan x? Newsflash, if it competes with the ti its also up there with titan x in performance terms, the vast majority of review sites have basically said the ti is a titan x with less ram, now it seems like you're trying to reverse that position.
Click to expand...

What on earth are you on about?:rolleyes:

I Have been saying the FuryX is going to be around 980TI performance but not beating the TX since the very beginning.
 
If the Fury X is going to be at the same price or cheaper than the 980Ti, I might just have to get myself one. The cooler is supposed to be designed for a TDP of up to 500W as well, while the card itself only has a TDP of 275W at stock speeds. Imagine the overclocking potential of that thing.
 
D.P. said:
What on earth are you on about?:rolleyes:

I Have been saying the FuryX is going to be around 980TI performance but not beating the TX since the very beginning.
Click to expand...

No what are you on about. Titan x and 980ti are virtually a lock in performance terms, just about every site has said that. You're waffling about titan x like its somehow significantly faster than the ti which it isn't, there's a couple of fps in it here and there and that's it.
 
Killer7xx said:
If the Fury X is going to be at the same price or cheaper than the 980Ti, I might just have to get myself one. The cooler is supposed to be designed for a TDP of up to 500W as well, while the card itself only has a TDP of 275W at stock speeds. Imagine the overclocking potential of that thing.
Click to expand...

Best deal at high end
 
D.P. said:
The Fursy X2 and the Nano are clealy the most interesting cards and soemthign Nvidia wont be able to do much about. OK they might squeeze a dual 980Ti but AMD have a big advantage with HBM memory.

My concern with the FuryX2 is each core will only get 4GB which will make it kind of useless for many purposes.
Click to expand...

has it :eek:....................********** :mad:
 
24th June fury X $649. July 14th Fury $549 and R9 nano later in summer and dual fiji gpu in the fall.

the air cool will be 100 dollars cheaper, but almost deffo the same PCB, it'll OC ok and you'll probably get other after market versions too, this is maybe the one to go for ?????????????
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom