• 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.

The Fury(X) Fiji Owners Thread

It's funny when something is so bad that every one can smell BS apart from the most deluded..

I just do what I always do. Go around looking at every review I can find, balance out the results and then make my mind up.

I've said it before many times, but GTAV on my Fury X is a whole 10 FPS faster than the two Titan Blacks I had so I couldn't be happier. I'm also playing through Metro 2033 right now on the highest settings at 4k (no AA as usual) and it too runs perfectly.

These people are not reviewers any way, they're just internet salesmen and women with their own soap box. He needs to be careful, AMD will strike him off the list and smite him lmao :D
 
ALXAndy said:
Vaguely? they beat SLI Titan X. However is that vaguely? you could do that for a grand ! £300 more than one Titan X.
Click to expand...

Or you could do with 980TIs and save a chunk over a FuryX setup. but hey, if you are going to be complete biased and ignore facts go ahead.
 
mururoa said:
Yeah they are such Nvidia shills that they gave R9 380 their gold award and strong recommendation over GTX 960 4GB just one week ago. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

The 960 4GB is about the dumbest product on the planet, just because they gave the obviously better card an award doesn't mean they aren't shills.

D.P. said:
Or you could do with 980TIs and save a chunk over a FuryX setup. but hey, if you are going to be complete biased and ignore facts go ahead.
Click to expand...

How would you save a chunk? The £60 you might get if you are lucky enough to get 2 non reference 980Ti's on a deal because the Fury X has price gouging? Not to mention the better Crossfire scaling would most likely make them perform incredibly similar even though the 980Ti can overclock higher, whilst the Fury setup would be much cooler and quieter? Yeah because thats totally worth an argument right :cool:

If you want to argue that, you could do it with 2 Furys and have incredibly similar, almost identical performance, and save an even bigger chunk! :cool:
 
Last edited:
Meladath said:
The 960 4GB is about the dumbest product on the planet, just because they gave the obviously better card an award doesn't mean they aren't shills.
Click to expand...

The 960 wins in some games vs. the competition and has lower power consumption to boot. Recommending better products is what I expect these hardware sites to do and they seem to be doing just that... Albeit their testing methods leave lot to be desired, Techreport is the best in this regard but their modus operandi of testing the 99th percentile FPS is not massively popular among the AMD diehards either. :rolleyes:
 
D.P. said:
Or you could do with 980TIs and save a chunk over a FuryX setup. but hey, if you are going to be complete biased and ignore facts go ahead.
Click to expand...

Even as a relative newcomer to this forum, who has cancelled his FX pre-order in frustration at AMD, I can see through your unabated AMD bashing.

As far as i've seen crossfire FXs scale and perform generally better than TIs at 4k in terms of fps, frametimes, temperature, noise, and cost.

The only thing they fall down on in is power draw (irrelevant to me and most other enthusiast users), and availability.
 
mururoa said:
The 960 wins in some games vs. the competition and has lower power consumption to boot. Recommending better products is what I expect these hardware sites to do and they seem to be doing just that... Albeit their testing methods leave lot to be desired, Techreport is the best in this regard but their modus operandi of testing the 99th percentile FPS is not massively popular among the AMD diehards either. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Now your just making crap up. 99th percentile in Techreport is no better or worse than Nvidia..
 
Last edited:
mururoa said:
The 960 wins in some games vs. the competition and has lower power consumption to boot.
Click to expand...

Please show me these games because I haven't seen a single one. Even the witcher 3.

mururoa said:
Techreport is the best in this regard but their modus operandi of testing the 99th percentile FPS is not massively popular among the AMD diehards either. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Lmfao what. Tech report is far from the best. 99th percentile FPS is not popular amongst anyone other than nvidia fanboys trying to show how much better their purchase was than billy bob down the street.

AMD generally has lower minimums that NVIDIA, that much is known, they also have more CPU overhead, The two are most likely linked. 99th percentile FPS isn't a good test because all it does is represent that absolute worst possible case, which means almost nothing to a consumer. 80th or 60th percentile is far better as an overall "smoothness" statistic, since it shows how often each card dips and by how much.
 
Last edited:
Meladath said:
The best thing about HardOCP is the ass backwards testing method they use. Instead of every other site on the planet that uses the same settings and shows the results, so you can see the ACTUAL differences in performance, hardocp changes the settings to "highest playable settings". Thus making some cards look much faster/slower than they actually are because it fell below the imaginary "playable fps" line the reviewer makes up.
Click to expand...

erm, they also do "apples for apples" testing, but I guess you choose to ignore that bit to have a bash at them

different reviewers have different test setups they use, that is actually a good thing so that you can see what differences they make and find the one that is closest to how you want to use the cards - by doing both "highest settings" as well as comparative same settings testing they give you a look at different settings in the same game

and if you look at their FuryX vs. 980ti vs. TitanX review, they actually ran lower settings for the FuryX, making it (by your reckoning) look "better" than it otherwise would have
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom