He said before he gets his fair share of freebies, could be a fury or 2 for all we know
-
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
- Thread starter Kaapstad
- Start date
He said before he gets his fair share of freebies, could be a fury or 2 for all we know
Soldato
Sometimes people including the review sites miss the obvious.
When the GTX 980 launched everyone raved about the performance yet when I actually got 4 and put them up against the 290Xs @2160p it was the older cards that came out on top. The 290Xs just worked better together @2160p.
At the moment the Fury Xs have a driver problem and also don't have voltage control but these things will be resolved and then things could get very interesting.
I got the Fury Xs because I am prepared to wait for the start up problems to be sorted.
I also think the Fury X is the best choice for playing my favourite game Civ5. This is a game that although old can cripple even the most powerful PCs if you have a massive map, huge empire and lots of cities.
^ This.
Looking forward to testing Fury X myself tomorrow
Last edited:
did you see computerbase.de review of civ beyond earth??
furyx did extremely well there.
Soldato
Nvidia haven't produced a working driver across the board since 350.12.
What is their excuse? Do they get a pass just because 'Nvidia'.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 30,806
Permabanned
Inconsistent? Vast majority of the reviews were consistently worse than the Ti.
AMD cards have always done well on the game due to the wide memory buses they use.
A TitanX can just about finish a massive game but hopefully a Fury X will have a bit more in reserve where it uses HBM.
The game devs have known for years about the loading problems with Civ5 in huge games but never got round to fixing it as 99.9% of people won't push the game that far.
Soldato
LOL so now i'm an nvidia fanboy, that seems to be what you're insinuating.
I've no clue about nvidia drivers or release schedules for drivers, ive plenty of experience of amd launches, this isn't the first time that performance has supposedly been held back due to drivers. They're releasing the first card in the industry with hbm memory, their flagship gpu, it doesn't perform as well as hoped and people are pointing the finger at the drivers. You honestly think that if something driver related was holding back performance that amd pr wouldn't be in full damage control mode, and they would have even launched the card in the first place?
Just face facts, its not the card that many hoped. Driver issues aren't restricted to amd obviously despite the popular opinion that they are.
2900xt had a similar launch "zomg drivers zomg drivers".
3870x2 "zomg drivers zomg drivers"
In both cases it wasn't the drivers and was more down to the performance of the hardware. Hell i'll do you one better than that, the radeon 8500 back in 2001 on paper was going to be a beast but turned out to be a decent performer but not what people had hoped for.
This will most likely be no different, will performance improve? Yes, performance generally does with driver revisions, but its not going to be a game changer. And randomly spamming cherry picked benchmarks around the place won't change people's opinion of that.
Software based AA vs hardware was the problem. The performance hit was due to Microsoft changing the DX10 spec as Nvidia failed to meet the target so AMD got punished for doing what was asked. So Nvidia failed and then got the performance crown for said failure so I have not got a clue why you'd use that as an example where drivers couldn't do anything to rectify the lack of hardware?.
Soldato
To be fair to Boomstick, he did have a dedicated thread for the positive aspects of the Fury X, and then had it closed and was told to put his reviews in this thread. Now he has done that he's accused of cherry picking, where as before he made it extremely clear the intention of the positive thread.
Software based AA vs hardware was the problem. The performance hit was due to Microsoft changing the DX10 spec as Nvidia failed to meet the target so AMD got punished for doing what was asked. So Nvidia failed and then got the performance crown for said failure so I have not got a clue why you'd use that as an example where drivers couldn't do anything to rectify the lack of hardware?.
It was the same end result, certain reviews showed the cards as being better than they were due to their way of testing. Some sites got crucified for showing the 3870x2 as being "not all that" when it wasn't all that at all. I had 1 for about 6 months and had 2 of them for a short time. I also had crossfired 1 gig 2900xt boards.
Have a look at anandtech's verdict on anti aliasing on the 2900 series.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/2231
Even without anti aliasing issues the 2900xt was still hot, loud and a lousy performer that was hailed as the second coming and also arrived late to market.
Last edited:
Sometimes people including the review sites miss the obvious.
When the GTX 980 launched everyone raved about the performance yet when I actually got 4 and put them up against the 290Xs @2160p it was the older cards that came out on top. The 290Xs just worked better together @2160p.
At the moment the Fury Xs have a driver problem and also don't have voltage control but these things will be resolved and then things could get very interesting.
I got the Fury Xs because I am prepared to wait for the start up problems to be sorted.
I also think the Fury X is the best choice for playing my favourite game Civ5. This is a game that although old can cripple even the most powerful PCs if you have a massive map, huge empire and lots of cities.
build big and conquer the lands.
I will await there soon with fury
Soldato
One thing I will say for Nvidia's approach to drivers is that while they might release some duffers, you don't have to install them (but they're there if you want to because they fix the one game you play most or something). With AMD's approach you don't get that option, you have to wait for the eyefinity crossfire 4K R9 285 features to be working before they'll release the driver with the crossfire profile for Call of Duty 3 (or is it CoD for in the next driver?)
And let's face it it's not like every AMD driver update has been flawless, well except for those ones that take 3 months and don't really add anything.
And let's face it it's not like every AMD driver update has been flawless, well except for those ones that take 3 months and don't really add anything.
Associate
What i really want to see is someone test the card with the 15.200 modded drivers instead of the 15.5 used in the reviews
Kaap can you do a comparison maybe?
Kaap can you do a comparison maybe?
Last edited:
I had one too, when I didn't run AA, the games I played ran a lot better than the X1900XT it replaced. With AA, it was a joke and the reason for that we've already covered. Even in that review, when AA is applied, it's worse off than the X1950XTX. When AA is not applied, in some titles it shows it's more than worth it for the price difference, others it shows exactly why the price difference was there so that's not a definitive point due to inconsistency.
As I said, the games I played received a decent boost without AA so my experience wasn't all that bad. When I bought my 8800GTX it was like night and day with AA applied. If Nvidia were forced to do AA through software then who knows what would have happened?. Also, are you forgetting the "Never Settle" drivers for the 7970?. By writing off the possibility of that happening when it happened in recent history is a bit confusing. I don't believe 100% that it will happen but I will also not rule out the possibility like you have.
Regardless of review sites, when OCUK users have these cards and can put it to the test then we'll know who to trust and not to. I prefer user tests over review sites and always will after being a victim of misinformation more than once. Also there is no over-voltage software as present so I do not share your pessimism regarding Fury-X. I'll just wait and see.
Nothing. Ek are making/have made blocks.