Guidelines Search before asking a question in the forum. The answer might be waiting for you. Feel free to blog about anything. For instructions on how to use the content creation tools, see the video on the left. If you are an author/ contributor to Tek Syndicate, hi.
Log into the Staff Area
VSR: Virtual Super Resolution.
Wow, nice to see the cards competing so close. The 980 is temping but with how amd is still supporting the 7000 series with performance updates via drivers 3 years out and nvidia has all but left the 700 series behind its hard for me to get one. Especially since I expect the 300/fury cards to get the same support. Oh well can't afford ether right now I'll see how they are when I can.
I'd get the AMD card purely from a moral standpoint.
Fury "pro" already beats the 980, and the in the coming months the gap is going to get wider and wider as drivers and dx12 rolls out.
To compare I just ran Valley and got FPS:26.3 Score:1102 Min FPS:18.8 Max FPS:38.7 (W7 DX11 UHD) with my 970/2500k which is a quite normal score I assume, Whats the deal there?
Was the result in the vid showing the minimum?
That fury looks like a nice card. Can't wait for AMDGPU/Vulkan-SPIRV on Linux so I can seriously think about getting one. Hopefully, AMD will finally stop making a mess of their drivers.
@WENDELL @Logan What about the memory overclock on the R9 Fury with Msi Afterburner unlock to Catalyst???
Here's it translated from Swedens premiere hardware site:
http://translate.google.se/translate?hl=en&sl=sv&u=http://www.sweclockers.com/test/20792-amd-radeon-r9-fury-fran-asus-och-sapphire/19&prev=search
if im right the HBM memory isnt realy overclockable yet.
Or atleast its hard to do.
Can't be done.
yup.
No it can be unlocked with MSI Afterburner. GPUZ was reporting speed changes and it was reflected in benchmarks. The gains aren't massive but they are there.
So the Fury is neck and neck in 1080 and 1440p, where I'll be playing for at least the next year or two. And I can get 980's for $350-400 on ebay. Why can't it just be 3% faster and push my hand. So close but yet not price viable imo for the performance. Almost a $600 card (None are actually going to be close to msrp for a while) vs a $450 (there is no way Nvidia won't drop the price) card. Idk why nobody else is looking at this and going fuck this, I'm buying a lightly used card off ebay. Neither of these cards to me make most any sense. When the 980 ti comes out everyone said the 980 is now redundant, but now the Fury X is out and fitting into the same spot as the 980 ti is. But for some reason the Fury comes out, which is the same spot as the 980, and everyone is losing there goddam minds over it. If it was just a little bit faster I could see it, but for me it's just not there. Idk, seems like fan boying on both sides of the fence. Anyways, ima go buy a 290x or 980 off ebay so you all have fun...
I will see if we have enough benchmarks to confirm this, or plot it, but the gains between "launch day drivers" and "one year old" drivers are at least 10%. It's crazy. If you look at our old benchmarks, even going back to the GTX 770, the gains just from driver updates were 10-15% across the board.
For these cards, DX12 and more mature drivers are going to make the difference. The 980 is already a mature card, and the 780Ti did not enjoy the same "10% a year later" that the 780 did because the 780Ti drivers were already about as good as they could get. (There are a few games that came out around the same time as a 780ti where, for that game, it did get about 10% after about 6 months.. but that's down to the game I think.)
It's likely once the HBM drivers are more mature, we'll see 10% gains.
For the 390X, on the other hand, it's not likely we'd see those kinds of gains from software. But that does explain why, at least for now, the 390X and Fury X are closer than they should be.
I can confirm above said. I have a 770 without OC with better results than what you got OCd back then.
Very true.
This is especially true with multi-GPU setups. My 2 R9 290s perform significantly better together now then they did when I first got the second card.
Additionally, OCing will become easier on the Fury series as things mature too. This 980 was OCed very high, quite a bit higher than GPU Boost would normally allow. Most 980s won't be that close. Interested in seeing the difference in temperatures and noise between the two as well.
On a side not and not related to Logan's view but more on the community, how come when certain nVidia cards are 5-10 FPS faster everyone loses their minds? Suddenly it is "killing" the competition even though it is more expensive it is totally worth it. When it is reversed we don't see that. Interesting.
As for pricing I'm sure both cards will continue to drop in price as time goes on so we shall see. As AMD get's better at making HBM, and after R9 Nano comes out, I wouldn't be surprised if all these cards saw a $50 price cut.
No star swarm benchmark? :(
I have been thinking the same. The Fury made the 980 relevant again and the 980 is arguably the better value depending on where pricing settles.
We shall see though...
Because I'm paying an extra $200 for 10 fps at it's most noticeable. For the most part It'll be about 3-5 fps. Which is negligible. Not to mention I would be supporting nvidia and all their shady s***t. I know AMD tends to bite off more than they can chew but, c'mon, at least the don't to ridiculous lengths to try to monopolize the market. From what I'm aware of, anyway.
The Fury/X 275w < 165w for the GTX 980. The Furry does preform better thou...
Maybe get some EK blocks, put them under water, overclock to the max (stable), then we will see which is truly better.
The cooler on the Sapphire Fury should be keeping it plenty cool.