AMD R9 Fury reviews!

[moonbogg]

That's an interesting card. Its almost like a 980 for the price of a 980, but a little better. Not bad. It beats the 980 by a little in many tests and that's an interesting product alright. Nice job AMD.

 

[Hitman928]

Yeah, I think they finally got a launch right, lol. If you're at 1080p, I don't think this card makes sense. At 1440p I think it's a solid alternative to the 980. At 4k (most likely in SLI/Crossfire) I think this would be the card to get. If Trixx / Afterburner can get voltage unlocked and it allows for higher overclocks, I think it's a good value. If not, it will probably need a price drop to closer match 980 aftermarket cards.

 

[Vesku]

Yeah, I think they finally got a launch right, lol. If you're at 1080p, I don't think this card makes sense. At 1440p I think it's a solid alternative to the 980. At 4k (most likely in SLI/Crossfire) I think this would be the card to get. If Trixx / Afterburner can get voltage unlocked and it allows for higher overclocks, I think it's a good value. If not, it will probably need a price drop to closer match 980 aftermarket cards.

Except for having reviews come out on a Friday, that's kind of odd considering it appears to be a decent SKU. Normally Friday is reserved for embarrassing information dumps.

 

[Hitman928]

Fair enough, though by pushing up the date a week, it seems (without any kind of real information on the launch) like they were just trying to get it out into the market. A theory (again, just postulating) is that having to push fixed AIO units for Fury X into the channel has created a 3-4 week gap between the initial batch and the batch with fixed units. Pushing Fury ahead a week could be trying to fill that gap. Could be lots of other reasons, like just trying to get some more positive news going after the bad press with the noisy pumps. Just some thoughts.

 

[moonbogg]

This card seems to be where its at. It fills a decent gap between the 980 and the 980TI/FuryX segments. Its just a nice middle ground where this card lives. You can OC it to get closer to the big expensive cards, but without spending the big expensive money. No crazy cooling required, no shenanigans necessary.
You can run two of them without having to find a spot for TWO ridiculous AIO water cooler radiators. Seriously, who has room for TWO AIO radiators in the back of their case? I just bought a monster case, and I could not fit two FuryX cards in it if I wanted.

 

[n0x1ous]

This card seems to be where its at. It fills a decent gap between the 980 and the 980TI/FuryX segments. Its just a nice middle ground where this card lives. You can OC it to get closer to the big expensive cards, but without spending the big expensive money. No crazy cooling required, no shenanigans necessary.
You can run two of them without having to find a spot for TWO ridiculous AIO water cooler radiators. Seriously, who has room for TWO AIO radiators in the back of their case? I just bought a monster case, and I could not fit two FuryX cards in it if I wanted.

2 at the back would not work in any case that I can think of. Would have to use the roof or the front and put cpu rad in rear 120

 

[cen1]

Pretty much every site except [H] has a positive review. [H] reads as if they really want to hate the card, it is really unbearable to read.

 

[crisium]

TPU review for all the chart whores out there:
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/ASUS/R9_Fury_Strix/1.html

And TechReport:
http://techreport.com/review/28612/asus-strix-radeon-r9-fury-graphics-card-reviewed

 

[Enigmoid]

I'm really having trouble seeing the value in this card.

Small improvement over the 980 at 1440p, same at 1080p.

Perf/$ leaves much to be desired.

Compared to an aftermarket 980 its slower at 1080p, equivalent at 1440p, little ahead at 4K. Overclock both and the 980 runs ahead at everything except 4K.

The nice thing

 

[Qwertilot]

There isn't ever going to be strict value in a monetary sense because supply is very constrained - for the moment (?) - so its got a rarity premium attached. Like with the X, if you're selling everything you produce it isn't overpriced
(Rarity presumably due to HBM being so new?).

 

[Sabrewings]

This card seems to be where its at. It fills a decent gap between the 980 and the 980TI/FuryX segments. Its just a nice middle ground where this card lives. You can OC it to get closer to the big expensive cards, but without spending the big expensive money. No crazy cooling required, no shenanigans necessary.
You can run two of them without having to find a spot for TWO ridiculous AIO water cooler radiators. Seriously, who has room for TWO AIO radiators in the back of their case? I just bought a monster case, and I could not fit two FuryX cards in it if I wanted.

Depending on hose length, I could probably fit four in my Obsidian 900D.

However, I would never do such a thing. Custom loops baby, not AIO kiddy coolers.

 

[shady28]

Have to admit, this is a nice card from initial reviews. A little bit faster than the 980 at 1080p/1440p in most games, significantly faster in most 4K games, and a little bit more expensive. At current prices, it's a no-brainer over most GTX 980s.

Now, lets see how fast Nvidia lowers the cost of a 980.

 

[Subyman]

This card practically kills the Fury X if you don't need AIO. Neither overclock well and are ROP limited at typical resolutions. I'd like to see a comparison OC vs OC. That is what sold me on the 980TI. Ref 980TI is fast, but a G1 with a typical OC is ridiculously fast, like 25-30% faster.

Looking forward to voltage control.

 

[Subyman]

Have to admit, this is a nice card from initial reviews. A little bit faster than the 980 at 1080p/1440p in most games, significantly faster in most 4K games, and a little bit more expensive. At current prices, it's a no-brainer over most GTX 980s.

Now, lets see how fast Nvidia lowers the cost of a 980.

Check out Anandtech's initial 980 review though:

http://www.anandtech.com/show/8526/nvidia-geforce-gtx-980-review/22

980 picks up a whopping 20% performance increase with an overclock on the reference cooler, so its a bit more complicated than looking at reference 980 vs a custom Fury OC.

 

[Jeff007245]

I think this will be the last upgrade for my main gaming rig and call it quits. I would have loved to get the Fury X, but I honestly don't have room for another AIO in my case. I can retire my beloved 7970 Ghz and move on to a whole new build. Finally, a single GPU worth upgrading to for my Eyefinity HD3D setup before I move on to Eyefinity 4k in the future.

 

[Enigmoid]

Have to admit, this is a nice card from initial reviews. A little bit faster than the 980 at 1080p/1440p in most games, significantly faster in most 4K games, and a little bit more expensive. At current prices, it's a no-brainer over most GTX 980s.

Now, lets see how fast Nvidia lowers the cost of a 980.

The 980 performs a little worse but is significantly cheaper.

4K is a niche at the current time.

As the TPU charts show this card is pretty weak in terms of perf/$.

 

[yacoub]

Anandtech's review was good as usual, but it kind of pissed me off because AMD's prices are stupid this time around. They used to be the better bang-for-the-buck alternative to NVidia. This time their cards are overpriced for the performance they offer and the specs they have.

The Fury would work at $499. The Fury X would work at $599. As debut prices that drop another $50 after the first month when all the early adopters have been wrung dry.

Until then, the 980Ti is the card to get. Pay a little more, and never have to deal with the limitations of HDMI 1.x, 4GB VRAM, and whatever else.

Also, the partners chosen for the Fury launch arguably couldn't have been worse. Sapphire is notorious for quickly dying fans (I've been burned by them three times, including one time I RMA'd it and the one I got back had the same thing happen within a few months again.) compared to every other vendor I've owned. And Asus is apparently notorious for poor customer service in the US market.

So yeah, I think I'll pass. Or just get a 980Ti and avoid the headaches. And that actually sucks because I want to support the underdog (AMD) and I have for the past decade or so. I've bought ATI/AMD cards since the early 2000s when they first started offering a better, more cost-effictive solution than NVidia. Looks like that has finally changed.

 

[Erenhardt]

Good to see overclocking is back into priority after it was disregarded during 7970 age.
I just hope it will stay relevant until we get tools to overclock fiji. Furious overclocking is voltage adjustment is gonna be interesting.
Oh, and cant wait for first dx12. Fun times ahead.

 

[Gikaseixas]

The 980 performs a little worse but is significantly cheaper

$50 difference for the performance delta i'm seeing is more than acceptable. Don't recall people questioning 980 prices when 970 and 290x performed not much worse and in those scenarios we're talking about $150 differences

 

[shady28]

Check out Anandtech's initial 980 review though:

http://www.anandtech.com/show/8526/nvidia-geforce-gtx-980-review/22

980 picks up a whopping 20% performance increase with an overclock on the reference cooler, so its a bit more complicated than looking at reference 980 vs a custom Fury OC.

Good point, I had to go back and look at the OC results of the Fury. Unless something changes it's not going to be much more than +5% over 'stock', while the 980 pulled down 20% OC.

That leaves the AIB a lot more room for factory OC on the 980 OC cards (for those like me who rarely mess with OC'ing a GPU).

980s are abundant at $480 right now, so the price comparison is already deteriorating. A few months ago they were universally over $500. Proof that competition is great for the consumer.

Big OC on 980 :

Small OC on Fury :

 

[Gikaseixas]

Oh, and cant wait for first dx12. Fun times ahead

AMD line up will benefit a lot from DX12. Can't wait to see benchmarks

 

[moonbogg]

Yeah, so its a good card, but at $550 it makes more sense to splash out an extra $100 and get a 980ti. The 980ti is still the card to get and will continue to be so until next gen. The Fury would make more sense at $450-$500 or even $400 since you are getting basically 980 performance and since the 980 has been out forever already it makes sense to charge less for that kind of performance this late in the game.

 

[x3sphere]

I think this card is a fine buy over the 980 at $550 although it doesn't shake anything up. The problem is the 980 Ti. 15% faster stock at 1440p and OC'd that lead increases up to 25-30%. That is way better price/performance for $100 more. Someone spending over $500 on a card to begin with can probably afford stepping up another $100.

NV just has to cut the 980 to ~$400 and then Fury vs 980 will look just as silly.

 

[yacoub]

Yeah, so its a good card, but at $550 it makes more sense to splash out an extra $100 and get a 980ti. The 980ti is still the card to get and will continue to be so until next gen. The Fury would make more sense at $450-$500 or even $400 since you are getting basically 980 performance and since the 980 has been out forever already it makes sense to charge less for that kind of performance this late in the game.

Yep, and NVidia can continue to drop the 980's price to match whatever AMD does at this point since it is an older card now.

 

[Head1985]

Nv currently only have 1 good card GTX980TI.Everything else is just worse than AMD cards
380 vs GTX960-380 winner
390 vs GTX970-390 winner
390x vs GTX980-same performance 390x is cheaper
Fury vs GTX980 Fury is 10-30% faster 50USD more expensive.Fury is no brainer
Fury X vs GTx980TI- only here Nv wins