• 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.

R9 290X Crossfire VS R9 Fury X?

Associate
Joined
17 Oct 2012
Posts
347
Location
unfortunately Mars
So after opening a thread with the question of "Do i get two Fury x cards" here is a review of some data that i have been working on...

Originally i was going to get two R9 Fury X cards, however, a lot of people said no, or its not worth it yet as there is better cards coming soon, so i thought that instead of getting two, i would get a single R9 Fury X and do some bench testing.

So just like the battle of the bands, there are two teams, the blue team being the standard clock speed and then there is the red team being the overclocked speed.

I never had the chance to compare the cards via games but i have successfully collected data for some of the main bench testing applications out there.


The computer is question and the hardware inside is as shown:

I5 2500k at 4.2Ghz (a more realistic speed then 5.0Ghz)
32GB HyperX Fury 2400Mhz memory
Asus P8Z77-V Premium Motherboard
OCZ 1250W Gold Power Supply

A note that i have to add is that my machine has custom water cooling so the temperatures are not going to be used as a bench test.

The R9 290X Crossfire Setup:

nT9oJmW.jpg

The R9 Fury X Setup:

UgvG3qf.jpg

So the battles begin!

I decided to do a standard clock speed run as well as a overclock speed run to see the difference as well as improvement.

First off i threw 3D Mark 11 into the mix:

jhjvFoV.png

A decent result for a card single card, compared to the 290x's especially.

Then arrived FireStrike:

TM1qKdS.png

Again a decent result, but you can see the 290X's pull ahead with the overclocking.

After a quick punch up, Unigine Heaven arrived :D

First off was the score:

cG1WdYV.png

Having Crossfire really hit hard against the Fury X.

Then came the FPS difference:

4rYfdj3.png

The Fury X holds a much better score with the lower FPS!

After a heavy round, the finishing blows arrived with Unigine Valley!

Again the score:

Uj7OUWw.png

Again the Crossfire really pulled ahead....

Then finally the FPS difference:

y7iksr1.png

The Fury X was almost the same for low FPS, but you can see how well a single card has done!



My conclusion being, the R9 Fury X is a really good card, overclocking is a little bit off as the card is so new, i managed to get a stable clock of 1155 and then 560 on the memory but the coil whine was annoying as hell!!

At this current time, i would stick with two 290X cards until better overclocking abilities come out for the Fury X, as we all know the card can do so much better, especially the memory....

I think thats about it, oh and the card looks awesome! :D
 
Nice info there Jacob! It's sure to help people in a similar position toying with the swap :cool:

Many thanks

Really doesn't seem worth swapping and your old set up looked so much cooler

I forgot to say at the end, after finding this information, looking over a single card, i will be getting a second R9 Fury X as soon as possible!!

I will also be getting the new EK R9 Fury X water blocks so i can refit all of the white acrylic tubing into the build :D so dont worry, the point of this was so i can see how a single card performs against two R9 290X in crossfire.

I guess the itch for something shiny and new is just too strong sometimes.

No it wasn't the itch, as im putting water blocks on as soon as i get the second card!!

Mainly the new HBM as well as a new processor, besides, i have always said that if you dont keep up with technology then you will get left behind :D :D
 
For me its the lowest FPS which is important, as the drops are what ya notice and it looks like the Fury does very well in that department.
 
OP there is something very wrong with your 290X Crossfire scores.

I use both 290Xs and Fury Xs.

When comparing two of my 290Xs to a single Fury X on the benches above it is not even close, the Hawaii cards are a long way ahead.

I suspect it may be a limitation of using an i5 2500k and your motherboard.
 
OP there is something very wrong with your 290X Crossfire scores.

I use both 290Xs and Fury Xs.

When comparing two of my 290Xs to a single Fury X on the benches above it is not even close, the Hawaii cards are a long way ahead.

I suspect it may be a limitation of using an i5 2500k and your motherboard.

probably be better running an I7, or is it down the the pcie lane being low ?
 
OP there is something very wrong with your 290X Crossfire scores.

I use both 290Xs and Fury Xs.

When comparing two of my 290Xs to a single Fury X on the benches above it is not even close, the Hawaii cards are a long way ahead.

I suspect it may be a limitation of using an i5 2500k and your motherboard.


Casual overclock on the 290x, I think that's safe to say. The detail on the benches is also a bit vague on the 3dmark stuff, pscore or gscore cannot tell?
 
OP there is something very wrong with your 290X Crossfire scores.

I use both 290Xs and Fury Xs.

When comparing two of my 290Xs to a single Fury X on the benches above it is not even close, the Hawaii cards are a long way ahead.

I suspect it may be a limitation of using an i5 2500k and your motherboard.

Each graphics card is different, i ran the cards overclocked, your overclocks might not be the same as mine, i dont know? but thats the results i got.

Im not worried if the scores are different, they are the scores i got, so im happy.

Its definitely not the motherboard or the processor, i can guarantee!
 
Each graphics card is different, i ran the cards overclocked, your overclocks might not be the same as mine, i dont know? but thats the results i got.

Im not worried if the scores are different, they are the scores i got, so im happy.

Its definitely not the motherboard or the processor, i can guarantee!

Here are my 4 Fury Xs up against my 4 290Xs @2160p, there is not a big difference.:)

ONOT8Hm.jpg


2160p


1 GPU

  1. Score 725, GPU TitanX @1494/2002, CPU 5960X @4.5, Kaapstad Link
  2. Score 710, GPU 980 Ti @1560/2000, CPU 3450 @3.5, Joe! Link
  3. Score 471, GPU 780 @1263/1852, CPU 4770k @4.5, whyscotty Link

2 GPU

  1. Score 1321, GPU TitanX @1455/1900, CPU 4790k @4.8, TTomax Link
  2. Score 1319, GPU TitanX @1380/2002, CPU 4930k @4.7, Kaapstad Link
  3. Score 1118, GPU TitanX @1216/1752, CPU 5960X @4.6, Cosimo Link
  4. Score 936, GPU nvTitan @993/1751, CPU 3930k @4.625, Gregster Link
  5. Score 700, GPU 970 @1478/2030, CPU 5930k @3.8, Clov!s Link

3 GPU

  1. Score 1292, GPU 290X @1230/1625, CPU 4930k @4.5, Kaapstad Link
  2. Score 1251, GPU nvTitan @1097/1753, CPU 3930k @4.4, whyscotty Link
  3. Score 1214, GPU 290X @1135/1500, CPU 3970X @4.4, LtMatt Link

4 GPU

  1. Score 2682, GPU TitanX @1480/2002, CPU 5960X @4.0, Kaapstad Link
  2. Score 1973, GPU Fury X @1130/500, CPU 5960X @4.0, Kaapstad Link
  3. Score 1759, GPU nvTitan @981/1788, CPU 3930k @4.8, Kaapstad Link
  4. Score 1702, GPU 980 @1472/1962, CPU 5960X @4.0, Kaapstad Link
  5. Score 1682, GPU 290X @1230/1500, CPU 4930k @4.8, Kaapstad Link
  6. Score 1382, GPU 290X @1000/1250, CPU 3970X @4.9, AMDMatt Link
 
Back
Top Bottom