Isn't that because of AMD's previously poor tessellation performance though? I mean everything is tessellated in Heaven!
-
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
Isn't that because of AMD's previously poor tessellation performance though? I mean everything is tessellated in Heaven!
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 30,821
On a side-note, looks like AT aren't even going to bother with a Fury X review! Just thrown the results up and that's it!!
Soldato
Yeah it's a weird one the frame buffer. because I've noticed that it's using smaller amounts than my older GDDR5 cards did. I haven't once filled up the 4GB in all the games I've tried.
Will do a proper test of Shadow of Mordor and Wolfenstein next, see if I can max out frame buffer and if it causes stutter when going to system.
Point taken, but that wasn't what was being discussed.
It was the about the cost of running said cards.
Caporegime
Unigine is a game engine, the benchmark are derived from it, you can set tessellation to extremes in it yes, as we do, its also really bad for DrawCalls, at least in the benchmark.
Tessellation shouldn't be a problem for Fury as the Tessellation performance is much higher.
Thats promising.
On a side-note, looks like AT aren't even going to bother with a Fury X review! Just thrown the results up and that's it!!
As far as I've understood, Ryan Smith has been sick and hasn't been able to do proper review yet. But where are those results? - Can't seem to be able to find them.
Associate
- Joined
- 10 May 2012
- Posts
- 1,741
Not sure if Wolfenstein is the best game to test vram.
I had hd 7970 and then I move to R9 290x which has 1gig vram more,game pretty much ran the same way on both gpu's (stutter,fps all over the place,gpu not fully utilized).
Would be great to hear how gpu with hbm memory behave in this game.
Enjoy your new gpu
Soldato
In the Bench\GPU 2015 pulldowns on the top menu - select furyx and whatever you want to compare it with.
Last edited:
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 30,821
Yeah but that was days and days ago now!! Dude must have been at death's door!!!! It's all moot now anyhow, unless they take a different slant to it
On a side-note, looks like AT aren't even going to bother with a Fury X review! Just thrown the results up and that's it!!
Still no GTX 970 to compare with either.
Associate
- Joined
- 31 Jan 2012
- Posts
- 275
I got 11850 http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/7496428?
I also got this "achievement"
'Your GPU is ready to rumble, but your CPU doesn't want to play.'
Could my 2600 be holding me back in games?
Also I did some testing last night at 5760x1080 @60hz
BF4 - Ultra = Avg 59
Witcher 3 - Ultra, no hairworks = Avg 35
Dirt Rally - Ultra = Avg 49
Crysis 3 - Ultra = Avg 26
Was a little disappointed with Crysis 3 but can get it in the 30s with lowering shadows and MSAA. Not sure what I'd get with a 980ti at this res etc.
Caporegime
Cant remember what I got with the spec in sig at stock, but with 4.7 on the CPU and cards clocked I hit just over 16000.
Associate
Anyone have one of these and running MMO's? Like Guildwars 2 etc?
Associate
- Joined
- 31 Jan 2012
- Posts
- 275
I've been considering it actually. I need a new mobo anyway if I want to go crossfire in the future, which I might do in a few months.
Is there any bundles on the store anyone can recommend? ie CPU, RAM, Mobo?
I was even thinking should I return the Fury and get a ti, but I can't find any benchmarks for a ti at 5760x1080.
edit
Also I sometimes play games while watching streaming shows in the background on my TV, I do think this affects my frame rates a bit.
That may even be 15.5 ^^^^
Its only faster than a 980 at 4K, by a cats whisker, none the less a quick card overall at any res snapping at the 980's ankles.
By that measure the 290X would be just as quick clock for clock.
Its possible AMD have had some huge Driver based performance improvements putting Hawaii right up there with the full fat GM204.
Mainstream reviewers just haven't retested Hawaii for some time.
Hawaii is actually quite an impressive bit of GPU these days.
If you remove Project Cars, WoW and CoD from that set of benches, you'd see very different graphs there. If you're going to try to claim statistics back you up, then you should be removing enormously anomalus results.
Last edited:
Looking at the pic of the fiji die its hard to believe that with each memory chip that's visible there's a stack of 3 other ram chips and a logic die connecting them to the interposer underneath. You'd literally think it was just 4 ram chips and nothing more.
