AMD fury reviews lacking

[monstercameron]

Here are a few metrics that I feel are missing from this round of reviews:
Compute
Video decode
Video encode
Frtc
Bandwidth effects on performance
Mantle
Dx12
Opengl\linux support (I know it requires amdgpu drivers)
Raytracing
Crossfire scaling
Nuanced uarch discussion
Dx9 test (not just skyrim)
Vr performance

All these small details help niche users decide the value of such new hardware.

 

[waldoh]

I wish anandtech was on there game with reviews. They have slowed down a lot.

 

[MeldarthX]

mantle was one I was very surprised on; its a very solid; card - once price settles and improved drivers - we know fury was driving Occulus Rift; pretty sure it was 2 furys....things are about to get very interesting

 

[Stuka87]

The review [H] made was a joke. They cherry picked all NV sponsored games and then complained about how bad the Fury is.

 

[Zstream]

The review [H] made was a joke. They cherry picked all NV sponsored games and then complained about how bad the Fury is.

It should be based on the most popular games (however you define it) and maybe a few indie ones at that. I'm thinking ARK survival, mechwarrior online, and some mmo's. Not everyone plays a twitch game

I wouldn't want to see a review with all AMD or Nvidia titles.

 

[HJustin]

The review [H] made was a joke. They cherry picked all NV sponsored games and then complained about how bad the Fury is.

[H] sucks. It looks like it did 10 years ago and they won't spend the money to provide a mobile version. Most of their content is a lot of click-bait BS cut and pasted from better sites, and they claim they're the only ones that know how to review hardware. The forum community is the only reason I bother with it at all. Of course you can't really criticize it there because Lord Kyle gets his panties in a wad and lays down the ban hammer. So freaking arrogant.

Looking forward to the Anandtech review.

 

[Subyman]

Hoping the Anandtech review comes up. Best one I've read so far is the TechPowerUp review.

 

[krumme]

I hope rs gets back from work. Read 40 reviews and give his analysis. He is my personal assistant.

 

[monstercameron]

I hope rs gets back from work. Read 40 reviews and give his analysis. He is my personal assistant.

hes has already made his analysis not in favour of fury x...

 

[2is]

Mantle is dead. There's no reason to review Mantle performance considering it will never be used on any game moving forward ever.

 

[IEC]

[H] sucks. It looks like it did 10 years ago and they won't spend the money to provide a mobile version. Most of their content is a lot of click-bait BS cut and pasted from better sites, and they claim they're the only ones that know how to review hardware. The forum community is the only reason I bother with it at all. Of course you can't really criticize it there because Lord Kyle gets his panties in a wad and lays down the ban hammer. So freaking arrogant.

Looking forward to the Anandtech review.

Tom's did a better job than {H}. Which is mind-boggling.

{H} seemed like they had a preconceived conclusion and wrote their entire review to fit that conclusion, rather than doing an objective analysis and coming to a conclusion after that.

 

[Hitman928]

Here are a few metrics that I feel are missing from this round of reviews:
Compute - www.computerbase.de
Video decode - www.computerbase.de
Video encode - www.computerbase.de
Frtc - www.computerbase.de
Bandwidth effects on performance eh?
Mantle Forgot which site, but one did test mantle
Dx12 How?
Opengl\linux support (I know it requires amdgpu drivers) Drivers. . .
Raytracing Not a firepro card
Crossfire scaling www.digitalstorm.com
Nuanced uarch discussion www.hardocp.com has a chart at least.
Dx9 test (not just skyrim) Why?
Vr performance See Dx12.

All these small details help niche users decide the value of such new hardware.

..

 

[monstercameron]

Here are a few metrics that I feel are missing from this round of reviews:
Compute - www.computerbase.de
Video decode - www.computerbase.de
Video encode - www.computerbase.de
Frtc - www.computerbase.de
Bandwidth effects on performance eh? the effects of going from gddr5 to hbm, scaling etc
Mantle Forgot which site, but one did test mantle
Dx12 How? 3dmark api overhead test and starswarm dx12 build
Opengl\linux support (I know it requires amdgpu drivers) Drivers. . .
Raytracing Not a firepro card blender/luxmark other enthusiast grade tools
Crossfire scaling www.digitalstorm.com
Nuanced uarch discussion www.hardocp.com has a chart at least.
Dx9 test (not just skyrim) Why? I play alot of older games
Vr performance See Dx12. occulus rift has been out for a while and is heavily comarketed

All these small details help niche users decide the value of such new hardware.

a few responses.

 

[tvdang7]

The review [H] made was a joke. They cherry picked all NV sponsored games and then complained about how bad the Fury is.

Well one line I read was yes it was faster at 4k but only by 2.4 fps. I feel saying that the editor is discrediting the progress so the reader should feel swayed into feeling negative towards the product.
EDIT

"For the first time ever in our evaluation, one game, at 4K is faster on the R9 Fury X (at unplayable settings on both cards mind you). The R9 Fury X is faster than the 980 Ti by 6%, in reality it is a whole 2.4 FPS average."

 

[Headfoot]

Tom's did a better job than {H}. Which is mind-boggling.

{H} seemed like they had a preconceived conclusion and wrote their entire review to fit that conclusion, rather than doing an objective analysis and coming to a conclusion after that.

I'm quite surprised. Tom's review was really exceedingly well done. Frame times, a good game selection, fair conclusions. They may be bringing Toms back from the dead

 

[krumme]

hes has already made his analysis not in favour of fury x...

Fine. Saved me 3 hours. Lol.

 

[Devildoll]

Dx12 How?

The only dx12 thing i know of is the api overhead test in 3dmark, which probably isn't accurately representative of actual dx12 performance.

but i found one website who had run the benchmark with the Fury X.

here you go.

 

[AnandThenMan]

I'm quite surprised. Tom's review was really exceedingly well done. Frame times, a good game selection, fair conclusions. They may be bringing Toms back from the dead

Yea I thought the Tom's review was also very good, I guess I should put the site back in my bookmarks. I'm not even going to bother with the reviews at [H] anymore.

 

[Mako88]

Here are a few metrics that I feel are missing from this round of reviews:
Compute
Video decode
Video encode
Frtc
Bandwidth effects on performance
Mantle
Dx12
Opengl\linux support (I know it requires amdgpu drivers)
Raytracing
Crossfire scaling
Nuanced uarch discussion
Dx9 test (not just skyrim)
Vr performance

All these small details help niche users decide the value of such new hardware.

None of which are important.

However one other certainly is:

Overclocked versus Overclocked, put the +100MHz (tops, if even that) Fury X against a +300MHz (common, 80%+ of Overclocker.com users) 980 Ti.

No one did that and frankly that's all that enthusiasts wanted to see. No BIOS flashing or other warranty-violating efforts, just vanilla overclocking to their maxes using the common software that most use.

Would have loved to see that, hopefully someone wises up and does it.

 

[x3sphere]

There are no actual DX12 games yet (correct me if I'm wrong?)

 

[Abwx]

None of which are important.

However one other certainly is:

Overclocked versus Overclocked, put the +100MHz (tops, if even that) Fury X against a +300MHz (common, 80%+ of Overclocker.com users) 980 Ti.

No one did that and frankly that's all that enthusiasts wanted to see. No BIOS flashing or other warranty-violating efforts, just vanilla overclocking to their maxes using the common software that most use.

Would have loved to see that, hopefully someone wises up and does it.

You are right, one metric can rule them all if accurately choosen...

 

[monstercameron]

None of which are important.

However one other certainly is:

Overclocked versus Overclocked, put the +100MHz (tops, if even that) Fury X against a +300MHz (common, 80%+ of Overclocker.com users) 980 Ti.

No one did that and frankly that's all that enthusiasts wanted to see. No BIOS flashing or other warranty-violating efforts, just vanilla overclocking to their maxes using the common software that most use.

Would have loved to see that, hopefully someone wises up and does it.

says you, its all important to me.

 

[Paul98]

Considering how the results from game to game were all over the place, I would have liked to see some in depth testing of different graphics settings.

 

[3DVagabond]

Well one line I read was yes it was faster at 4k but only by 2.4 fps. I feel saying that the editor is discrediting the progress so the reader should feel swayed into feeling negative towards the product.
EDIT

"For the first time ever in our evaluation, one game, at 4K is faster on the R9 Fury X (at unplayable settings on both cards mind you). The R9 Fury X is faster than the 980 Ti by 6%, in reality it is a whole 2.4 FPS average."

They'll change their tune once they get an Asus model. [H] loves them anything Asus.

Are noise and temp no longer buying considerations?

 

[SolMiester]

They'll change their tune once they get an Asus model. [H] loves them anything Asus.

Are noise and temp no longer buying considerations?

Are you purposely ignoring the pump noise in the equation?, or is that not part of the card?