I have this feeling that since users can't buy Fury/X, they're buying 390/X

[tential]

went and checked benches to see where things stand. Seems the fury x is about the same as a 980 ti at stock (1440p up).

I guess the advantage really comes down to the cards with factory OCs etc. I had thought the performance difference was stock vs stock.

I do think stock performance matters more and because the 980ti has so many factory OC models with higher stock clocks, it's currently a better value with a simple assessment.

For sales I think the 980ti gets a lot more PR. There are so many models and sites just keep reviewing them. The fury x being only reference means on review, then off the front page. Same with Fury with 2 cards

You'll need to cite some references like I did please. The Fury X doesn't get talked about more not only because there is only one model, the performance isn't there. That's why it doesn't get talked about.
It doesn't get talked about because no one lives in your world where we compare reference to reference and that's it. We live in the real world where we're purchasing real products and yes, there are factory OC'd models out there. BOO HOO.
The reality is, the Fury X will flop the second it gets volume out. Meanwhile, you'll STILL see lots of models of GTX 980Ti's sold out because people are STILL clamoring to get their hands on it no matter how many are being churned out.

No need to believe me though, look at marketshare and see if Fury X helped AMD gain any marketshare.... lol.

 

[Eymar]

If you don't plan on buying another video card in next two years, yeah I would go with 980ti. Though if you know you'll be buying a new video card next year when Pascal\AMDs FinFET GPU(Greenlands?) then buy whatever video card fits your stop gap requirements (4k or 1440p performance or monitor tech Freesync\G-Sync). The 390x and 980 would seem to fit most stop gap requirements at a reasonable price. If I were in the market for a new monitor with Freesync\G-Sync I'd have to go Fury\X as freesync monitors have really taken off in terms of choice and also have better input options.

 

[bystander36]

went and checked benches to see where things stand. Seems the fury x is about the same as a 980 ti at stock (1440p up).

I guess the advantage really comes down to the cards with factory OCs etc. I had thought the performance difference was stock vs stock.

I do think stock performance matters more and because the 980ti has so many factory OC models with higher stock clocks, it's currently a better value with a simple assessment.

For sales I think the 980ti gets a lot more PR. There are so many models and sites just keep reviewing them. The fury x being only reference means on review, then off the front page. Same with Fury with 2 cards

I think in many comparisons, stock vs stock makes sense, but not so much with the Fury X, because the Fury X has no OC head room, that is pretty much all you can expect, while the 980 ti has huge amounts of OC room. If you are going to own a 980 ti, you most likely will have much, much higher clocks than stock, while if you have a Fury X, you will likely be stuck at stock settings.

For practical comparisons, you'd want to compare the aftermarket, factory OC 980 ti's, which most likely will still have more OC room than a stock Fury X.

 

[Azix]

You'll need to cite some references like I did please. The Fury X doesn't get talked about more not only because there is only one model, the performance isn't there. That's why it doesn't get talked about.
It doesn't get talked about because no one lives in your world where we compare reference to reference and that's it. We live in the real world where we're purchasing real products and yes, there are factory OC'd models out there. BOO HOO.
The reality is, the Fury X will flop the second it gets volume out. Meanwhile, you'll STILL see lots of models of GTX 980Ti's sold out because people are STILL clamoring to get their hands on it no matter how many are being churned out.

No need to believe me though, look at marketshare and see if Fury X helped AMD gain any marketshare.... lol.

Someone makes a valid point and if its even possible its not damning on the Fury cards you want to argue. Press sites aren't going to keep pounding on about a card just because its performance is "there". They need new material and there are a ton of 980ti cards to review.

Why I made the point was that I was looking at fury reviews (guess i should "cite some references" and saw this: http://www.guru3d.com/articles-categories/videocards.html

On that one page there are several unique 980ti articles.

MSI GeForce GTX 980 Ti Gaming OC Review
Gigabyte GeForce GTX 980 Ti G1 Gaming SOC Review
Nvidia GeForce GTX 980 Ti Review
ASUS GeForce GTX 980 Ti STRIX Review
Zotac GeForce GTX 980 Ti AMP! Extreme Review
Palit GeForce GTX 980 Ti Super Jetstream Review

There's one Fury X review and a lot of those 980ti reviews won't even bother caring about gameworks. This is not to say the Fury X is better than the 980 ti, so please don't cry. I was just pointing out yet another problem with the release. I've come to the conclusion that launching reference is a straight up bad idea

You're like the negative of a fanboy man. it's weird. AMD must have really hurt you in the past.

What I said was that the reference performance is similar and the factory OC is what puts the 980ti ahead. Not sure why you need citations for that but ... 980ti vs Fury reference performance citations.....

Focusing on the bold this I what drives me nuts.

The unbiased among us, myself railven, etc. All are able to recognize the current market and how competitive nvidia is when we all previously recommended far more amd cards.

Now we get ridiculous arguments like "the fury isn't overpriced the gtx 980 was sold at that price!"

The gtx 980 was the fastest card on t he market... The fury is a lol worthy card that gets crushed by a oc 980ti in value to me.

I don't have loyalty to these companies so the gtx 980ti and r9 390 are my 2 favs

I would appreciate it if you stopped oversimplifying arguments you don't understand. You are negative on AMD to fault. When I said that I put the word worth in quotations for a reason. It's a complex comparison and for the arguments in that thread I thought I should point out that it would be "worth" it for some people. Strictly speaking a stock card that is only $50-80 more expensive AT WORST and is faster would be "worth" a purchase similar to how people bought the 980 at that price. You guys also ignore that newegg prices aren't the only prices in the world and not all have the mail-in rebates. In most places the difference is $20 - $60 with some 980s costing more.

You can claim you don't have loyalty all you want, at the very least you are an AMD hater. Haters gonna hate.

I am 91.59% sure these arguments would not go this way if it were nvidia costing more for sometimes marginally better performance.

 

[soccerballtux]

yeah he's pretty anti amd

 

[tential]

yeah he's pretty anti amd

Have to hand it to the R9 390. I almost got a little carried away and tried to take a shot at the performance per dollar king. Saw the numbers, had to dial it back a bit lol. You don't take a shot at the king after all unless you come prepared.

I'm so anti AMD.... and you can go through my post history and see my numerous recommendations of many AMD products. Just because it was a good choice then, doesn't make it a good choice now.

 

[RussianSensation]

I'm so anti AMD.... and you can go through my post history and see my numerous recommendations of many AMD products. Just because it was a good choice then, doesn't make it a good choice now.

I think a lot of people are bashing Fury based on TechPowerUP's review which shows NV in literally the best light because:

1) He doesn't apply the highest settings in all games (specifically anti-aliasing). This helps NV cards.

2) He doesn't remove from his averages games that blatantly favour NV (ProjectCARS is an outlier and was designed for NV cards, period)

3) He includes results that are literally an anomaly on the Internet (Wolfenstein NWO benchmarks on other sites are not showing horrible performance on AMD cards).

4) He does not appear to test games with Mantle even if AMD cards work fine/faster in certain titles with it.

5) His WOW benchmark has already been called to have nothing in common with real world raiding online.

Fury is 17% faster at 1440P at Sweclockers against a reference 980. We know that a reference 980 boosts to 1200mhz. That basically means that it'll take nearly a maxed out 980 to match a stock Fury.

But, Sapphire Fury provides this performance at ridiculously low noise levels that no 1.5Ghz 980 will ever touch.

Computerbase has Sapphire Fury OC at 31.5 dBA at MAX load. They even recorded a video:

http://www.computerbase.de/2015-08/asus-radeon-fury-strix-test-sapphire-amd/4/

The quietest GTX980Ti available for sale in US is eVGA 980Ti and that manages 41 dBA.
http://www.computerbase.de/2015-08/partnerkarten-geforce-gtx-980-ti-test/4/

So now with $25 off $200 visa coupon, Fury can be purchased for $535 or so. Sure, that's a premium over a $470-480 980, but you do get guaranteed performance without needing to overclock, no need to even worry about a rebate and most importantly, it will be the quietest high-end card out in North America.

Therefore, while the Fury will not touch a 980Ti in price/performance when it comes to overclocked performance, your disregard for other positive factors for Fury (uber quiet, guaranteed performance over a 980) is what makes other people question your objectivity.

In reality since you already mentioned that you want the flexibility of Nvidia's DSR, I think already made up your mind that you are going NV next so I suppose subconsciously you are trying to downplay the positives of Fury.

Also, if someone wants to add a 2nd card down the line for Cross-fire, Fury CF will destroy 980 SLI.

Making the argument that 980 is a great 1080P card is somewhat pointless since 980 itself at $470-480 is a waste of $ over a $280 970 for 1080P gaming. If you are going to argue about using DSR/VSR at 1080P, then you would need to look at 1440P/4K benchmarks since VSR/DSR is super demanding.

1080P VSR settings:

2560 X 1440
3200 X 1800
3840 X 2160 (AMD Radeon™ R9 285, AMD Radeon™ R9 380 and AMD Radeon™ R9 Fury Series)​

Unfortunately as GPU demands increase with more pixels, 980 falls even more behind the Fury by nearly 25%! So the argument that 980 is better for 1080P + DSR vs. Fury for 1080P + VSR doesn't work at all since 980 gets worse and worse the more pixels it has to deal with.

Also, VSR is using a better/clearer filter than DSR's (blurry) Gaussian one and it's evident in some games but you hardly mention this point. In other words, it's not all win with team NV (aka 980 vs. Fury isn't as clear cut as you make it).

If you don't plan on buying another video card in next two years, yeah I would go with 980ti. Though if you know you'll be buying a new video card next year when Pascal\AMDs FinFET GPU(Greenlands?) then buy whatever video card fits your stop gap requirements (4k or 1440p performance or monitor tech Freesync\G-Sync). The 390x and 980 would seem to fit most stop gap requirements at a reasonable price. If I were in the market for a new monitor with Freesync\G-Sync I'd have to go Fury\X as freesync monitors have really taken off in terms of choice and also have better input options.

That's a great post although I'd drop the stop-gap GPU recommendations to 290/290X/970/390 unless you can find a 980 for $370-380.

 

[tential]

Pretty sure GTX 980 vs Fury is other thread. This thread, I'm now Anti AMD because I prefer the MSI GTX 980Ti over Fury X.

 

[railven]

Pretty sure GTX 980 vs Fury is other thread. This thread, I'm now Anti AMD because I prefer the MSI GTX 980Ti over Fury X.

Bingo. Moment you cast your chip with an NV product your years of AMD recommendations are instantly wiped out.

But that's the name of the game.


And Russian forgot this card:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814487144

Which is actually the quietest 980 Ti one can buy in the US (if they are lucky enough to catch it when it comes in stock. Haha).

If it performs like the 980 Hybrid, I'd expect it to give the Sapphire Fury a run for the quietest crown.

 

[brandonmatic]

Bingo. Moment you cast your chip with an NV product your years of AMD recommendations are instantly wiped out.

But that's the name of the game.


And Russian forgot this card:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814487144

Which is actually the quietest 980 Ti one can buy in the US (if they are lucky enough to catch it when it comes in stock. Haha).

If it performs like the 980 Hybrid, I'd expect it to give the Sapphire Fury a run for the quietest crown.

I really love all of these super quiet cards! That Sapphire Fury is a thing of beauty, although too rich for my tastes. My guess is that the key to its amazing performance is the unobstructed heatsink that extends past the end of the short Fury PCB. Allowing the air to flow through unobstructed increases the cooling by leaps and bounds. I think any Fury AIB card that doesn't take advantage of the shorter PCB is making a huge mistake (ASUS).

 

[stahlhart]

You can claim you don't have loyalty all you want, at the very least you are an AMD hater. Haters gonna hate.

This is the last warning you're going to get from me -- you stop making the discussions here personal, NOW, or you're getting kicked out of this forum permanently.

Other members besides yourself have different reasons, requirements, and other criteria for making purchasing decisions that aren't the same as yours. GET OVER IT.

-- stahlhart

 

[tential]

Bingo. Moment you cast your chip with an NV product your years of AMD recommendations are instantly wiped out.

But that's the name of the game.


And Russian forgot this card:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814487144

Which is actually the quietest 980 Ti one can buy in the US (if they are lucky enough to catch it when it comes in stock. Haha).

If it performs like the 980 Hybrid, I'd expect it to give the Sapphire Fury a run for the quietest crown.

This is also a performance test btw Railven. Now, I just stumbled upon the Wasabi Mango displays. These monitors have freesync and they're big...
How big? They have a 42 inch, 55 inch, and now a 65 inch coming out.
So yes, now I definitely am getting that since it's a TV sized monitor with freesync lol (or will get some derivative of it down the line).

My card for my own personal use now is far more up in air than ever before with Freesync monitors coming this large. I had NEVER thought that would happen this quickly, so AMD's open standard Freesync is very successful to me in that regard. The low working refresh variable range is lame, but works for what I want as up to 60 hz is fine for me at 4k anyway. Have to find a swivel arm now that will put large screen monitor at a decent distance from my bed for 4K gaming vs using my projector now.

Edit: It comes down to the same thing I notice usually. If I want performance right now Nvidia has it. If I want xyz feature right now? Nvidia has it.

If I want the total package of what I want? AMD WILL have it. And that's the problem, AMD has a great overall system, but it takes awhile to hit it's stride and by then, Nvidia has a new feature out that AMD has to catch up on as well.

Either way, if I had been AMD at the Fury X launch, I would have made it clear that "Yes, we don't have HDMI 2.0, but we know even large scree monitor makers will be putting this tech into big screen monitors that will be the same size as HDTVs, [insert list of makers here]."
My idea of Fury X performance would still be meh, but my excitement for the card would be MUCH HIGHER. Now that I see that HTPC gaming is very much possible with an order overseas to SK for a pretty nice monitor (I'd say a monitor at sizes/response times you won't get from HDTVs right? At the price of many premium HDTV sets... and it includes freesync (if it included gsync or there was a gsync model/equivalent out there I'd be happy too but haven't seen any gsync models that are hitting the ultra large HDTV market).

I did say whichever company made big screen monitors that supported their gsync/freesync tech would get my money. So that's looking like AMD now after that research.
STill not happy with Fury X performance, GTX 980Ti is a lot less appealing to me PERSONALLY if AMD can get freesync into big screens. Sucks for those who already have a 4K panel and need HDMI 2.0, but for those of us who need big screen gaming and were wishing for a tech like freesync, AMD may eventually be the defacto go to for the HTPC Market who is very well informed and willing to purchase monitors from overseas (so..... like not that many people? But those who do will enjoy those setups immensely I imagine!).

 

[Eymar]

My card for my own personal use now is far more up in air than ever before with Freesync monitors coming this large. I had NEVER thought that would happen this quickly, so AMD's open standard Freesync is very successful to me in that regard.

Haha, aint that the truth. I really didn't expect AMD to follow through so went ROG swift back in September. It's a great monitor and I absolutely a believer in benefits of VRR, but lack of inputs and monitor features is big negative. Anyways, to get on topic I think VRR monitors will alter purchasing decisions in that people can purchase video cards based on monitor VRR range so can go with lower tier card (i.e. 980 vs 980ti or Fury vs Fury X) if card can stay within or above that VRR range.

 

[tential]

Haha, aint that the truth. I really didn't expect AMD to follow through so went ROG swift back in September. It's a great monitor and I absolutely a believer in benefits of VRR, but lack of inputs and monitor features is big negative. Anyways, to get on topic I think VRR monitors will alter purchasing decisions in that people can purchase video cards based on monitor VRR range so can go with lower tier card (i.e. 980 vs 980ti or Fury vs Fury X) if card can stay within or above that VRR range.

I'd still get a Fury X probably but that's because I'm looking at 4K VRR monitors.
If you're looking at 1440p, then your strategy is the one I'm looking at.
At 4k, well I'm still looking at your strategy, but it's just I don't think Fury or GTX 980 is enough.

At 4K though, the Fury is a far better choice with VRR over the GTX 980 though of course. Especially with the unlock Fury has?(which looks safe right?), then if I were looking for a value choice over Fury X, I'd get Fury and unlock. But the incremental difference at that point, I'd go to Fury X. My rig is super loud and gets hot with my HD7950. If Fury X is truly silent and works in my VRR 4K refresh range, then I won't be able to notice the performance deficit over a GTX 980Ti + 4K HDTV without VRR. May even be improved performance since the GTX 980Ti I get, I won't have anything with VRR to use it with.

So ya, I think once you factor in VRR monitors like you said your choice can change drastically.