[HardOCP] 390x too close for comfort to R9 Fury

[tential]

Perhaps he assumes that H hasn't ever tried Fury at 4k even though the site preaches max playable settings.

Their site goes for max playable settings like you said. Why would they display 4K settings which would NOT be the max playable settings? It's clear they go for highest settings at the highest resolution possible. Clearly, HardOCP would NOT consider 30 FPS playable at 4K or anywere near 30 FPS. HardOCP considers sometimes even FPS that is acceptable to me to be completely unplayable.

HardOCP's sometimes has periods of times where there are gameworks titles in the mix (due to how HardOCP picks their game selection), so it doesn't count. When HArdOCP has a lot of GE titles, then Fury X/Fury will be talkd about how great they do in those reviews I bet....

Those are some pretty harsh words against HardOCP as a bench site it's not my go to first stop, but I definitely read each review they post.

 

[Silverforce11]

50%? Ok.... ya that's the end of my conversation with him.

Conclusion:

"AMD Radeon R9 290X Creamed

You don't have to look long at our results today to see that the AMD Radeon R9 290X is crying out for help. The AMD Radeon R9 290X is currently AMD's flagship single-GPU, just like the GeForce GTX 980 is NVIDIA's flagship single-GPU. Other than adding more GPUs, this is as fast as it gets in single-GPU form from both AMD and NVIDIA. Yet, it looks like the AMD Radeon R9 290X is lagging severely compared to what NVIDIA currently has on the table.

The GeForce GTX 980 is making the AMD Radeon R9 290X look like last-generation technology, which you can argue it is since its launch nearly 1.5 years ago. We are shocked how far behind the Radeon R9 290X is falling from the newer GeForce GTX 980. It seems to keep falling further and further behind in every evaluation we write! Chock some of that up to the clocks we are seeing, but drivers are certainly part of that equation as well."

And blames AMD for drivers, in mostly GW titles. Nuff said.