AMD Fury X Reviews

[S.H.O.D.A.N.]

http://uk.hardware.info/reviews/615...-flag-ship-graphics-card-overclocking-results

If true this could be big! 100mhz of on mem and core gave such a decent boost.

If this is what they got with a 100mhz overclock, imagine what the likes of Sapphire or MSI will be able to do with full access to clocks and voltage settings.

Kinda looks like Fury X might be the Titan X for AMD and the stock Fury variants could beat it by a fair margin.

 

[Headfoot]

Is there any real confirmation Fury (no X) will be cut down? Previous rumors said so, but previous rumors never mentioned the Nano in any way. I wonder if Fury (no X) will be the 980 Ti to Fury X's Titan... ultimately better performance and perf/$, and Nano gets the cut down chips.

A fully enabled, voltage unlocked, aftermarket air cooled, out of the box overclocked Fiji for $550 would be the real game changer. Much like how the 290x wasnt really all that great at launch for the price but the 290 changed everything.

 

[ShintaiDK]

Unless yield is extremely high for the 600mm2 die (And its not) or they expect to sell tonnes of Nano (That then is cutdown). Then by logic alone it has to be cut down.

 

[Headfoot]

I imagine they do anticipate selling a lot of Nanos since its supposed to be the cheapest one of the lot. It could be that Fury is cutdown, Nano is same amount of cut down but at a really low clock. The rumors have been pretty sparse as to the two lesser variants of Fiji

 

[Glo.]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XzFe5OOHZko Looks like DX12 really gives AMD GPUs quite big boost in performance.

 

[ShintaiDK]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XzFe5OOHZko Looks like DX12 really gives AMD GPUs quite big boost in performance.

I assume you didnt pay much attention to link you posted.

Game settings:
Performance:
1080P
Textures: High
Tx firtering: Anis. 16x
V-Sync: No
A-A: Off
FXAA: Off
SMAA: Off
Reflections: Low
Environment Map: Low
Car Detail: Medium
Track Detail: High
Shadow Detail: Low
Motion Blur: Low
Render Ahead: 1
Detailed grass: Medium
Particle Level: Medium
Particle Density: Medium
Streched Headlight Reflections: No

Visual FX:
PP On
Lens Flare Off
Sun Flare Minimal
Bloom On
Heat Haze Off
GSI: Off
Drops: No
Vignette: No
Rays: Yes

Welcome to CPU benchmarking.

 

[Glo.]

Anyways, something got rid of high overhead of CPU in Win10.

Im trying to think of anything...

 

[Stuka87]

Anyways, something got rid of high overhead of CPU in Win10.

Im trying to think of anything...

Its called DX12.

 

[boozzer]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XzFe5OOHZko Looks like DX12 really gives AMD GPUs quite big boost in performance.

that is a 20 to 30% increase to fps!!! insane!

 

[SPBHM]

I assume you didnt pay much attention to link you posted.



Welcome to CPU benchmarking.

http://pclab.pl/art63999.html

but as far as I know it's just DX11 on win10,

 

[ShintaiDK]

Its not a full featured driver yet. That explains a lot.

http://www.amd.com/en-us/solutions/software-partners/microsoft/windows
https://community.amd.com/thread/180474

 

[wege12]

Its not a full featured driver yet. That explains a lot.

http://www.amd.com/en-us/solutions/software-partners/microsoft/windows
https://community.amd.com/thread/180474

I know I'm probably in the minority here, but I have a very good feeling about the future performance of the Fury X. From all the evidence I've seen, I strongly believe that the drivers are not fully baked yet. Thats not the take way from AMD not being 100% ready for the launch though.

Also, with the 8 ACE's in Hawaii and Fury, I have a gut feeling AMD gpu's, especially the Fury line, will significantly improve performance once DX12 hits. Plus, we've seen that DX12 almost eliminates the CPU overhead that plagues AMD gpu's on DX11.

Last but not least, we have much better overclocking on the horizon when the voltage is unlocked. Many people don't remember that Nvidia has locked voltage on a few cards at launch as well. I just don't think AMD is dumb enough to hype overclocking on stage and not be able to back it up.

Time will ultimately tell, but I'm incredibly optimistic. Plus, it's not like the Fury X performs horribly, just not quite well enough to be priced the same as a 980ti, right now.

 

[Ancalagon44]

If the drivers were not ready yet, then why launch the card? Remember when the HD 2900 launched with immature drivers? And now recently when Arkham Knight dropped, still steaming and fresh?

If drivers would make a difference, then they should have waited another month for them to be improved. First impressions count, and if drivers would make a difference, then those first impressions would be significantly different. Those that were waiting for Fury X are probably going to buy a 980Ti.

 

[Vesku]

If the drivers were not ready yet, then why launch the card? Remember when the HD 2900 launched with immature drivers? And now recently when Arkham Knight dropped, still steaming and fresh?

If drivers would make a difference, then they should have waited another month for them to be improved. First impressions count, and if drivers would make a difference, then those first impressions would be significantly different. Those that were waiting for Fury X are probably going to buy a 980Ti.

Imagine the negative impact on Fury X perception if they held it back another couple of months after their big E3 participation. Or worse, canceled being at E3 and went completely quite until Aug-Sept.

 

[IEC]

I know I'm probably in the minority here, but I have a very good feeling about the future performance of the Fury X. From all the evidence I've seen, I strongly believe that the drivers are not fully baked yet. Thats not the take way from AMD not being 100% ready for the launch though.

Also, with the 8 ACE's in Hawaii and Fury, I have a gut feeling AMD gpu's, especially the Fury line, will significantly improve performance once DX12 hits. Plus, we've seen that DX12 almost eliminates the CPU overhead that plagues AMD gpu's on DX11.

Last but not least, we have much better overclocking on the horizon when the voltage is unlocked. Many people don't remember that Nvidia has locked voltage on a few cards at launch as well. I just don't think AMD is dumb enough to hype overclocking on stage and not be able to back it up.

Time will ultimately tell, but I'm incredibly optimistic. Plus, it's not like the Fury X performs horribly, just not quite well enough to be priced the same as a 980ti, right now.

I'll believe it when I see it.

But, I've got at least another 3 months before I scratch the upgrade itch (if not longer) so they've got at least a quarter to get it right

 

[Phynaz]

Is there any real confirmation Fury (no X) will be cut down?

I don't think so. What I heard is the only difference is the water cooler.

Edit:
Maybe so, but there's no confirmation:

Next up is the $549 R9 Fury, an air-cooled version of the Fury X. Specs are thin on the ground for regular Fury, but it appears to feature the same aluminium construction as the Fury X along with a blower-style fan for venting hot air directly out of the case. It's likely that the Fury will drop some stream processors and ROPs compared to the Fury X, but we'll have to wait until we hear something official from AMD to get confirmation.

http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2015/06/amd-unveils-r9-fury-x-fury-and-nano-graphics-cards-2/

 

[Despoiler]

If the drivers were not ready yet, then why launch the card? Remember when the HD 2900 launched with immature drivers? And now recently when Arkham Knight dropped, still steaming and fresh?

If drivers would make a difference, then they should have waited another month for them to be improved. First impressions count, and if drivers would make a difference, then those first impressions would be significantly different. Those that were waiting for Fury X are probably going to buy a 980Ti.

AMDs card launch drivers are usually just good enough to get the card out the door without causing a full riot by the people that bought the cards. At least in my experience across several generations. If you look at the Fury X frame times it's pretty obvious the drivers are super rough. A couple more driver versions and things will be noticeably better. The next AMD driver for Fury X will be folded into their unified driver from what I have read.

 

[tential]

So basically amd cards should see a significant performance improve across all games with Windows 10?
Nvidia should stay the same (not saying it's bad just statement).

 

[Glo.]

Im wondering, how much in 4K AMD GPUs are held back by CPU overhead. Are the differences smaller or bigger? Or is it 20-30% across every single resolution standard?

That would be completely hilarious to see R9 390X at performance levels or faster than... GTX 980 Ti...

Edit, it looks like it fluctuates depending on situation, between 25 and 40% improvement on performance on 1920x1080. Its getting really interesting, now.

 

[wege12]

So basically amd cards should see a significant performance improve across all games with Windows 10?
Nvidia should stay the same (not saying it's bad just statement).

Both current AMD and Nvidia gpu's will see improvements but AMD will see the largest performance improvement. This is due to a few things. First, AMD gpu's have a much higher CPU overhead with DX11/Windows 8 than Nvidia does. So when DX12 releases and is utilized, AMD has more ground to gain from the start.

Second, current AMD GPU's are waaayyy more optimized for DX12 than current Nvidia cards. One of the main reasons is that all GCN based cards have ACE's (Asynchronous Compute Engine) built into them. On DX11, they are barley used but with DX12/Windows 10 they will become a huge part of development. Thus, AMD will have an advantage that DX12 can leverage that current Nvidia cards wont be able too. Below are some links better explain AMD's ACE's and DX12:

http://www.anandtech.com/show/9124/amd-dives-deep-on-asynchronous-shading

http://www.technobuffalo.com/2015/0...-to-live-up-to-their-full-potential-says-amd/

http://wccftech.com/amd-improves-dx12-performance-45-gpu-asynchronous-compute-engines/

One thing is for sure, exciting times are coming for PC gaming in regards to DX12! :thumbsup:

 

[tential]

When are the first dx12 games coming? I thought it was 2016?
Doesn't seem like much of this matters amd has a forward looking design but by the time it's useful nvidia develops it into its own gpus anyway

 

[Despoiler]

When are the first dx12 games coming? I thought it was 2016?
Doesn't seem like much of this matters amd has a forward looking design but by the time it's useful nvidia develops it into its own gpus anyway

Fable Legends is out this year. Ashes of the Singularity is in Alpha right now, which you can get access to by being a game founder. I'm tempted to pick this up just to see DX12.

 

[Glo.]

Possibly the games that are in "constant development" like Heroes of the Storm, World of Tanks, World of Warcraft, etc will get it as soon as possible.

 

[ShintaiDK]

I see the new hype have taken off. Good luck with that.

 

[Glo.]

So far, we can see that old GCN 1.0 GPU got 20-30% boost to performance in 1080p just with the system. Are we hyping anything? It is interesting, so far.