T.E.D. de Medici haha i saw it too lol and btw the card still has the beta drivers i checked the hardwarecanucks channel when they benchmarked it not much of a diff with 980ti and Titan x
Good card. 980 ti slightly more performance or Fury X being smaller, quieter, cooler and potentially faster if one knows how to overclock as soon as that becomes available.
***** GTX980Ti gained ~20% on overclocking. So the Fury X will need to gain ~25% on over clocking to beat it. I doute its going to happen. So 980Ti wins as they are the same price.
GrumpyFink The 980 ti has been out for a while. Don't crown a winner until the Fury has settled down with proper drivers and other updates just like the 980 ti has had time to do.
+Felipe03000 Gotta agree :p They're really falling back now though. Their CPUs are pretty bad now and their GPUs are freakishly hot :/. It's almost not even worth the low pricing because of the temps. I hope Zen and Polaris change that for AMD tho
Johnathan Bloch Some of the AMDs gpus are veeery cold (like my R7 265 SHAPPHIRE), but yeah, the HD 7xxx are hot as hell. We need to wait for the next cpu line to see if AMD learned something :3
This is really disappointing. I've been up all night waiting for reviews of this card so I could decide if I wanted to buy a couple today. All the leaks I was seeing made it seem like Fury X was outperforming the 980Ti in most games and benchmarks. I know drivers could improve this over time but probably not by a large enough percentage to justify it. It's also nice that it runs cooler and quieter than any other enthusiast card, but the performance that AMD was touting just isn't there. The 4GB of memory also removes surround 4K as an option until DX12 is released and there are games that can actually take advantage of pooled memory. There's no reason to get this when you can get a 295X2 (which outperforms everything at 4K) right now for the same price.
DiehlGames Check out the 'guru3d' for a better review. The card is being quite effected by drivers at low res end while at 4k its an even enough race with 980ti
it has HBM 1.0 memory that has 4096 bit bus compared to GDDR5 that has only 512 bit bus for amd and nvidia has GDDR5 384 bit bus. Its a new type of Vram that is extremely fast for 4k or any high rez gaming above 1080p.
So disappointed. Waited a long time for this one, as it was expected and meant to be faster than the 980 Ti. It's the same price, yet slower on almost all fronts. Now that the 300 series are all rebranded, things are not looking very good for AMD. Which is a huge shame, as I really wanted that very much needed, healthy competition in this brutal market.
The drivers for the Fury X is still in Beta im pretty sure, expect better performance when they get new ones etc. With that cooler you can probably overclock it quite a bit too.. It just released ffs.
Guy Random I'm pretty sure AMD could build a card faster than the 980 Ti. I don't think this one was suppose to be. This is getting new technology out there, i don't think they want to push the limits of it just yet, They are probably still finalizing it. I'm not sure what you're disappointed about, i'm pretty excited to see what's to come.
Guy Random Its the same price? Uhm yeah no. The Air cooled version which you could compare to the 980 TI is 100 Dollars cheaper. So 550$ VS 650$ practically same performance. AMD fury x wins in that.
***** Ye agree they shouldnt with the latest games. I think 4k is only possible to date and after some months you can forget to play on 4k with those cards on max settings :P
A.V. D. It’s gone to my friends first rig using all of my old internals. i7 4790k & a Fury X! I’ve now got a 2080ti which I picked up for cheap a month before ampere dropped!
Its almost 2019, and i STILL love my R9 Fury-X and on my new Ryzen7 2700x x470mb and 16gbDDR4, this card runs AMAZING and so, #$%^ vega 64 and GTX 1080 ti, i think all stay with my fury-x because if im getting 90fps or 130fps on ALL VR OR none VR games on ULTRA. i think thats good enough for me.
Masterdome You might as well get this card, the 980 ti only beats it by a couple of frames(in some cases) plus this card is on really early drivers so optimisation isn't great. Also this card is cheaper!
Masterdome I also got the 670. Really it's as good as it needs to be for 1080p gaming. If you're going to stick with a regular 1920 x 1080 monitor then there isn't much of a reason to upgrade. If you're planning on getting a 4K... then yes upgrading would be very helpful in pushing all those pixels. Some people might say "Oh but upcoming games like Star Citizen will be too much for my old card!" Yeah well... SC might still be a year away, so you should buy your new card in 2016 if you want to use it for SC.
Wawaweewa Rice Most reviewers who were scared of losing Apple's goodwill said the Watch was "promising for a first gen". Honest reviewers, however, just bashed it.
barmiro that makes more sense, but no the fury X is legitimately good for the price. It is more quiet and cooler than a 980 ti, but if you get the water cooled version of the 980 ti then you get a definite winner
You call that a review? It's just a video where you tell us what some other reviewer got, we did not even have context and the rest is just sponsor shit. This is just plain fuck up. You had to put that video up that bad?? You really needed that money? fuck man. I'm really disappointed.
***** I know I sound like a fucking bitch maybe because I'm so angry how disappointing the fury X actually turned out to be.... I generally don't fucking care about the ads but the fact that did nothing with the card that I had high hopes for turned me into a fucking internet bitch. I am impatiently waiting for win 10 benchmarks and hope that this will be it for the fury X or else I will have to buy for the very first time, a nvidia gpu :/
This video talks way too much about the size of the card. Why would it be a negative if electronics are small? It's what it does that matters. Why don't you glue on some useless plastic parts if you want to compensate for something?
+Penny Lane There are a few reasons to have a larger card. Mainly more spaced out PCB, which if shrinked too much could become extremely complicated (which generally means more expensive), larger spaces to put on more beefier power system, etc. Most people are going to be watercooling these types of cards anyways. It doesn't hurt to have a better system for power delivery for reference cards which are usually the ones covered, minus EKWB. Sure the Fury X is already watercooled, but there are people who won't stop there :P
What were you expecting? Kepler and GCN have the same performance core for core. Maxwell gains a ~40% per core performance boost while AMD is still using their 2012 architecture from the HD 7000x series. 3072x1.4=4300.8 which is slighter higher than the 4096 cores found on Fiji. Still very impressive for a 2012 architecture
Wawaweewa Rice actually GCN is something they have been iterating upon heavily (GCN 1.0 from 2012 is quite different to GCN 1.2 from 2015) and saying as we knew we were going to be somewhat slowed down in the die shrinks deparment iterating upon something makes sense if you want the paradigm shifts wait untill next year and 16nm/HBM gen 2
***** ***** GCN is a long term architecture and 1.2 has little differences from 1.0 in terms of actual performance, just minor tweaks Tonga's main benefit was color compression, but it peformed almost identically to the 280 as well as the older 7850
Well yeah it has HBM and yes it's the first card of it's kind...but the 980Ti has 2GB more RAM, is often faster, uses less power and costs about the same...I'm kind of team red but seriosly AMD it's a nice small card but WHY would I buy it for my normal sized PC??
Highspeedfutzi you wouldn't. considering you can't even overclock this card there really is no reason to buy it I would wait for the next gen. cards to come out before trying this new tech out.
Highspeedfutzi Agreed. At this point there is no proper reason to go for a Fury X (if the benchmarks shown in this video are even remotely true). 7 years of development for a technology that can only pull off 4 GB of memory... seriously... I'm more into AMD but this is kinda pathetic.
I think AMD knows that 1080p and 1440p won't be the future and you got plenty of performance for those resolutions already with lower tier cards, so they purely optimized for resolutions of 4K and above, because that's where the Fury X really starts to shine with 10-20% more performance than a Titan X. In compute performance it even beats the Titan X by 75%, while using less power completing the same task, so it is definitely not aimed at the casual gamer. What's interesting is that only one game can max out the 4GB HBM stacks at 4K, which is Assassin's Creed: Unity and with the improved compression it uses less VRAM than the 290X, so it won't be a bottleneck in upcoming games with even better texture compression. At this time it's the most powerful and most efficient workstation card, let's see what the drivers will bring in the future.
Razor Blade If AMD are counting on 4K becoming standard within the lifetime of this card, they're going to be sorely disappointed. 4K is still a few years away from becoming the standard for PC gaming and I think it would be very foolish of AMD to be concentrating on that market at this point in time. We're talking about a company that's hemorrhaging money at the moment and cannot afford to ignore where the majority of the market is today.
MiloDarkStar Many people are using 4K already and since the prices for those monitors are dropping drastically we will probably see the majority of users sitting infront of one or more 4K screens in 2 years. Nobody wants to pay a premium for a graphics card able to handle these resolutions then, so the technology has to be brought to the market now. This is not a card for the masses, it's for the people who want to enjoy and test gaming at those resolutions now. Someone who can only afford a 1080p or 1440p screen won't aim for such a powerful graphics card anyway.
***** I already said AC: Unity is the only game that would need more than 4GB on 4K on the Fury X, but still there are no framedrops or any other issues. Look up the reviews and you will find the Fury X with 4GB HBM beating the Titan X with 12GB and the 980TI with 6GB in almost every game at 4K, even in GTA V. NVIDIA cards need more VRAM as their compression ratio is not that high as it is on GCN 1.2. In addition to that the Fury X handles it's memory usage dynamically in a very efficient way without crippling the performance. In Witcher 3 @ 4K with Ultra details it uses only 2GB. With HBM 2 there will also be configurations of 4GB-8GB per stack, so 16GB-32GB per GPU with double the speed. I'm not sure if they will release it on this generation of cards, but definitely on the next one.
***** No they don't. Some game engines will load as much as they can into the video memory. Thas does NOT mean it is all filled up with textures the game will be using any time soon. 4gb will be enough even for UHD gaming. The fact that the 390 has 8gb only has to do with MARKETING!
Rem ko Actually the 390 and 390X have 8GB GDDR5 because it doesn't cause much more cost, as GDDR5 is damn cheap. The reason why they only have 1GB per stack on the Fury is that HBM is just not in it's final state yet.
The mini build guide of those cables actually made me finally understand the point of easily customized cables. Very neat. Although I imagine it would be very easy to mess it up and short out your entire everything.
Depends on what you want from the system. The thing is, everyone was comparing the Fury X to the 980 Ti when it first came out when really that wasn't what it's for. The best part about the Fury X is that it's extremely quiet, to get the same noise levels you need to compare other liquid cooled GPUs which makes the X actually pretty good value. I wouldn't recommend buying one right now, though. Pick up an RX 480 for cheap and let that hold you over while saving your money until Vega 10 launches which is looking to be right around december.
For that price there is no doubt that the 1070 is a better "bang for buck", but the R9 Fury X does come somewhat close in performance, is quieter, and supports FreeSync. Ultimately I find it a worthwhile value proposition for 1080P games at that price.
***** Are you stupid? If the Titan x had a massive TDP would it still not be the fastest card? Just because the card has a big TDP doesn't mean its not good...
I appreciate that you guys experiment with your video format and structure, not many people out there are brave enough to do that :) Plus, I think that the flak you guys get for stuff sometimes is pure ridiculous - keep up the good work!
WTF it only beats the 980 ti in far cry 4? I thought this card would be at least 10% faster but as it turns out the rumors were fake and Its even slower
Just saw Fury X in a local marketplace for a coffee and a doughnut price, came to youtube to check if I should.... And here's young Luke telling me all about it!!!! Great!!
AMD said the bandwidth had plenty more performance to provide, but they were literally hit by the interposer chip size limit on the GPU side, so couldn't throw as many transistors at it to make the chip itself faster to take advantage of it. The next process shrink can't come soon enough, we're literally at the performance limits of 28nm unless interposers somehow get bigger.
Wow, a third of this video is a plug and the review is about how it looks and sounds since the sample was broken and therefore doesn't cover the thing that is most important, or rather the only thing that really matters which is how well it works. Would it not have been better and shown greater integrity to not release this video until a working sample had been tested? It's a card showcase followed by an advert and no original material in terms of critique or analysis.
Stephen Wakeman Agree.This is so unprofessional. They dont have the card,used other reviewer's benchmark (which has shitty graphs btw), and still has the audacity to publish it in time with the nda lift. Also that ending ads takes up like 1/5 of this video.Shame on you LTT
Man, watching all of the build guides and looking at all the PC's. Yet, I know I well never be able to buy/build. I can only look and wish to get one of them.
***** Actually im running both AMD CPU (fx-6100) and a msi AMD- r9 280x, I just am not impressed with their progress in the last 4 years. IMO they put their fingers in too many pies (CPU,APU,GPU) and lost ground on their competitors. i used to hate team green, but these days honestly they are looking like the better company. Intel stuck to cpus and made some real nice progress in that field then branched out into ssds and nvidia stuck to gpus and has dominated the market. the truth hurts me just as much, and i hate to admit it but truth is truth. take last year for example when amd released there 8gb card and thought they had one over nvidia. Less than 8weeks later nvidia just casually threw out their 12gb titan z. unless AMD are holding back and going to produce something amazing that smashes 980ti/titan X for the same price or something with similar performance for a fraction of the cost (which had mainly been their marketing strategy for the last 7 years) i think they are going to hemorrhage money become bankrupt and end up like the dinosaurs.
berzu21 i would more so say that it was due to the fact that the team in charge of porting arkham knight, where 12 people who primarily worked with consoles not PC, also strange how recommended GPU ram for nvidia cards is 2gb and AMD is 3gb, this either shows that the poor guys who had no real clue how to port a console game to pc mainly used nvidia cards for optimisation, or that AMD cards are inefficient at utilising the onboard ram (this could also be tied to the rumour that nvidia have underhandedly paid companies to focus on their cards rather than AMD's this was brought up upon the witcher 3 release), i would like to believe my former statement is true. Also not to mention most games these days on day one release have problems, that and also AMD users have also experienced problems with this game even after the AMD driver update specially implemented for arkham knight.
DANNYonPC not true, never had issues with drivers nor the gpu itself. It's the game's developer that has issues making it work well for the gpu...not AMD's job.
This card is SO FUCKING pretty. I don't care if it's marginally worse than a 980ti. This technology might be what brings AMD back to the game in a year or less.
If nvidia drivers weren't shit right now, 980 ti would be the obvious choice. I have two 980s btw, not trolling or anything. It's been a shitty season as far as games go with these horrible console ports.
***** It has a higher clock speed than the 6900k, and dual-channel DDR4 (or even DDR3) has been shown to have more than enough bandwidth for any practical consumer application, such as gaming (Linus has talked about this on this channel). AMD never said the RX 480 would be even close to the 1080. Those claims were made by false rumors. AMD said that it would roughly match an R9 390, which it does. As far as the Fury X's performance goes, watch the video or read a review. It falls a bit short of the 980 Ti, but is way ahead of the 980 (with the exception of the GameWorks-riddled Project Cars).
***** I haven't fallen for the hype train. My stance is based on all of the official information that has been released up until now. I think that if it actually does perform similarly to the 6900k, it will be at least $500. What do you mean by "they let rumor happen"? Intel and Nvidia don't comment on rumors before launch, either. You show me the benchmarks that put the Fury X between a bunch of GTX 980s in a wide range of titles. I've read many Fury X reviews, and it's very rare to see a 980 scoring higher than a Fury X in any game, let alone most of them.
I'm so not disappointed by this. As the owner of smaller case I am excited to be able to be able to finally fit all this power in my PC! I'm almost certainly gonna go for an R9 Nano! The Performance - to - Size ratio is the real winner for me here. I don't really care that it's 2-3 frames per second less powerful than a GTX 980 Ti
I'm not an AMD fan boy but this video seems fishy... - AMD sends new gpu - Linus drops it on the ground - Says it arrived DOA - Can't do tests so look at these graphs from another website that tested mostly Nvidia optimized games. - Nvidia's cheaper GTX 980 is better - Three minutes of advertisements BTW LTT is sponsored by Intel & Nvidia
futmut1000 Yeah, it's kind of sad hearing: "Oh yeah? Well..l just you wait, they are going to release a new driver that is going to make it 20% faster! And then, and then, when you can overclock it, it's going to be way faster too!" Just pat them on the back, and say: "That's right little Jimmy, that Fury X is going to grow up and be big and strong, and it's going to get out of that wheelchair and do great things!"
***** He said his card was DOA, not to mention the scores on the video showed lower frames on most games. So how about you come to me with a valid point, fucking idiot.
***** I'm not going to drag this any further, I'll just state facts for you. 980 ti > Fury X. They're literally the same price, but the 980 ti gets higher frames. And the benchmarks come from a fully functioning Fury X. Now get out of my post, everyone sees that you're a pathetic troll, a bad one at that.
So it has come to light that this card might actually perform way better than most people thought. Most reviews were done using driver version 15.15-150611a-185358E but with the new 15.15-180612a-18565BE it is supposed to even beat the titan x in some tests. I'm just trying to get more people aware of this. Here's the reddit post containing more information: www.reddit.com/r/pcmasterrace/comments/3b2ep8/fury_x_possibly_reviewed_with_incorrect_drivers/
@@syntrx8185 This FuryX is fine for what I do. I will probably get a VEGA for £150 soon having sold one for £500. Something I am really keen on is high refresh rate monitors. Not so much for gaming but the quality of scrolling and mouse movement. My aim would be to have a 360Hz screen which would dictate which GPU I required.
Hardware Canucks got results that competed quite strongly with the GTX 980Ti and Titan X. Plus, they note some acoustic information about the card. I would check out their review of the card as well.
for everyone dissapointed, alot of the benchmarks are saying that the fury x is higher than the 980ti, plus it is running on a very low clock speed with water cooling so lets see how a 2ghz version shall run against the titan x
This is their first venture into a new era for graphics cards, so I'll just hold onto my money and wait for whatever they come up with in the future, when HBM is more mature.
I've been debating on getting a new card for awhile, but after looking at the FPS reviews, im not so sure I need one. I know there is more to a game than just the GPU so maybe im doing something right. My FPS scores (all are based on max graphics 1080p) Alien Isolation-Avg 63 Far Cry 4-Avg 58 GTA V-Avg 57 Project Cars-Avg 57 Shadows of Mordor-Avg 56 Dying Light-Avg 58 No tweaking of the graphics, changing draw distance or anything. Just Ultra settings and playing. Full screen 1080p. System AMD FX8350 Black-Clocked to 4.5ghz MSI R7970 HD Boost Edition 16gb Corsair Vengance Pro 1Tb SSD Aftermarket fans, no liquid cooling or anything. In fact the only game I have come across I need to change anything on was Ark, holy shit that game is intense. All medium settings and barely making 30 frames, shit is brutal. Im going to wait another year or two before I decide to change.
The two 8 pin pci-e power plugs support up to 300 watts, the card gets the other 75 watts from the pci-e slot itself. The way Luke said that was incorrect, so I thought I'd share my wisdom.
Water cooling, small form factor, and performance right there with the GTX 980ti with most games staying between 2-3 FPS from it and that is at launch, so expect that to improve with driver revisions. I think the Fury X is an awesome card.
I would love see if an AMD latest and greatest APU coupled with a Fury/Fury X/Nano would yield a significant performance gain over a regular CPU/GPU combination
The performance is pretty good, no one expect for Fury X to really beat 980 Ti, the main thing is the price, if fury is gonna be cheaper by anywhere from 70-150 bucks then yh, amd did their part.
the future of GPU is in the built in water cooling block. while i predict many cards will come equipped with standard fans for rigging to a custom cooling loop, there's just so much ease and consistency in a built in, ready-to-go AIO unit....right inside the card. i like that.
Maybe if they removed the watercooler, put a cheaper Air cooling shroud on it, they could cut the cost of the whole unit drastically and basically offer something that performs on par with a 980ti for a whole bunch less. The watercooler is nice and all, but I feel it's holding this card back a little.
Smart money will go with the nvidia 980ti and wait for HBM to mature into 2.0 with the Pascal Gpus. The AIO watercooling is a sign of weakness from the start to hide high temps and high power draw that would come with having more than 1 fan.
Paying a premium for the watercooling is absolutely no problem, as you can get the normal Fury (The video is the Fury X), which is air-cooled. No problem here.
Everyone keep in mind that drivers make a huge difference. They are comparing launch drivers versus cards with multiple driver updates. No card from anybody has ever had it's best performance on day 1.
Barack Smith While this is true lets get realistic, they launch a card they have been working in for years to beat the competition and they cant make a driver to beat it at launch? So if it takes them years to make it do you think they will improve the driver weeks or months after launch? If so they are no better than releasing faulty games with first week patches, its getting out of hand with these companies.
regarding the cablemod cables... I don't think I would use these... ever. I like every cable to be the same. They don't have any SATA, Molex or Header cable extensions? Surely wouldn't cost much to add those to the line-up, since they don't even assemble them. Maybe a thinner gauge cabling is required and they just couldn't be assed working it out, I don't know. Seems like a no-brainer to me though!
I'm all about cards being 1. Smaller 2. attached to a dedicated liquid cooler These are good things! Your gaming rig does not need to be a full size tower to function cool itself. It can be small and spicy like a habanero. +1 from me
Image working on HBM for 7 years (plus the years with HBM2), to drop everything on the floor and use GDDR6
so true :(_ _ _
F*cking Linus dropping the card!
T.E.D. de Medici haha i saw that too , damn it linus!
T.E.D. de Medici haha i saw it too lol and btw the card still has the beta drivers i checked the hardwarecanucks channel when they benchmarked it not much of a diff with 980ti and Titan x
T.E.D. de Medici timestamp?
In which video?
ziomek266 it was on their vlog at vessel
Good card.
980 ti slightly more performance or Fury X being smaller, quieter, cooler and potentially faster if one knows how to overclock as soon as that becomes available.
That reminds me of certain two other cards...
***** GTX980Ti gained ~20% on overclocking. So the Fury X will need to gain ~25% on over clocking to beat it. I doute its going to happen. So 980Ti wins as they are the same price.
GrumpyFink That should be tested before judging the winner though o.O
GrumpyFink The 980 ti has been out for a while. Don't crown a winner until the Fury has settled down with proper drivers and other updates just like the 980 ti has had time to do.
*****
yeah potentially... keep dreaming
"HBM memory"
"High bandwidth memory memory"
"DIMM module"
"Dual Inline Memory Module module"
Poviku-PPcans seems right ;)
"DIP Package"
Dual inline package package
PIN number, ATM machine, SAT test, ICBM missile, ABS system, LAN network, HIV virus, LCD display... etc. So?
"AP Pistol"
"Automatic Pistol Pistol"
Amd aways creating new things, first the 1 Ghz cpu, the first multi cored processor, and now hbm.
also invented and implemented 64-bit instructions on CPUs.
Alvin Buenaventura yeah
+Felipe03000 I could not say I'm a amd fanboy, but I'v almost runned amd stuff more than intel/nvidia.
+Felipe03000 Gotta agree :p They're really falling back now though. Their CPUs are pretty bad now and their GPUs are freakishly hot :/. It's almost not even worth the low pricing because of the temps. I hope Zen and Polaris change that for AMD tho
Johnathan Bloch Some of the AMDs gpus are veeery cold (like my R7 265 SHAPPHIRE), but yeah, the HD 7xxx are hot as hell. We need to wait for the next cpu line to see if AMD learned something :3
Screen Junkies logo spotted at 3:24
MasakoX you sir have a really fast eye, props to you for spotting that.
Fkn Mickey Ever heard of 0.25 speed?
MasakoX Wow its really hard even on 0.25 how did you do that?
MasakoX Didn't think I'd see you here.
Supernir I work in post production so I've developed an eye for noticing stuff. Good or bad.
This is really disappointing. I've been up all night waiting for reviews of this card so I could decide if I wanted to buy a couple today. All the leaks I was seeing made it seem like Fury X was outperforming the 980Ti in most games and benchmarks. I know drivers could improve this over time but probably not by a large enough percentage to justify it. It's also nice that it runs cooler and quieter than any other enthusiast card, but the performance that AMD was touting just isn't there. The 4GB of memory also removes surround 4K as an option until DX12 is released and there are games that can actually take advantage of pooled memory. There's no reason to get this when you can get a 295X2 (which outperforms everything at 4K) right now for the same price.
DiehlGames Right? I've been waiting for reviews as well. I held off on the 980ti. Think I might just pick one up...
DiehlGames The leaked benchmarks were from AMD's press kit so obviously, they're going to cherry pick the games where their card performs better.
Hakeem Hakim You might want to hold off until the voltage control gets unlocked, at which point we should see the true story.
***** Why don't we compare both cards overclocked. Isn't it a bit ineffective to compare a non overclocked card against one that's Overclocked?
DiehlGames Check out the 'guru3d' for a better review. The card is being quite effected by drivers at low res end while at 4k its an even enough race with 980ti
Only 4GB of RAM? I suspect that I'm going to have to download more RAM before even trying to game at 4K with this card
it has HBM 1.0 memory that has 4096 bit bus compared to GDDR5 that has only 512 bit bus for amd and nvidia has GDDR5 384 bit bus. Its a new type of Vram that is extremely fast for 4k or any high rez gaming above 1080p.
Doom VUlkan 60FPs 4k All ultra settings :D
+92Cope damn i got 130 with gtx 1080 :p
+Ferry Ansony not in 4k ultra you didnt
iamtheonewhoyoulove I'm on 1440p
At 4K i got around 80-ish fps
Right now LTT has 2699,503 subs. You know what that means. E5 2699 V3's for everyone!
That would be nice?
Oh yeah!
Not for you, because you're a "TRAITOR!"
***** Did you even watch the force awakens
TR-8R Yes.
1:08
I came 7 years too late to tell you the gpu is missing a screw left up corner
Dead on arrival? You dropped it on the floor!
Alexander Rodríguez Linus did that, not Luke.
Yeah, i know... I was using the plural you, not the singular one.
Alexander Rodríguez when did this happen? Never heard of it.
mocool05 its up on vessle. their 2nd our in the new office.
Alexander Rodríguez As if products have never arrived DOA before
1:22 that missing screw lol
Dude I saw that
mosnaidei lol
So disappointed. Waited a long time for this one, as it was expected and meant to be faster than the 980 Ti. It's the same price, yet slower on almost all fronts. Now that the 300 series are all rebranded, things are not looking very good for AMD. Which is a huge shame, as I really wanted that very much needed, healthy competition in this brutal market.
The drivers for the Fury X is still in Beta im pretty sure, expect better performance when they get new ones etc. With that cooler you can probably overclock it quite a bit too..
It just released ffs.
Guy Random I'm pretty sure AMD could build a card faster than the 980 Ti. I don't think this one was suppose to be. This is getting new technology out there, i don't think they want to push the limits of it just yet, They are probably still finalizing it. I'm not sure what you're disappointed about, i'm pretty excited to see what's to come.
Guy Random Its the same price? Uhm yeah no. The Air cooled version which you could compare to the 980 TI is 100 Dollars cheaper. So 550$ VS 650$ practically same performance. AMD fury x wins in that.
***** Well it has to the 390x is outperforming the 980 in 4K gaming. Now its time the fury x shines :P
***** Ye agree they shouldnt with the latest games. I think 4k is only possible to date and after some months you can forget to play on 4k with those cards on max settings :P
After nearly five years of service I just sold my Fury X. Bye bye buddy.
should have kept it. Impossible to find a gpu at dcent prices now
A.V. D. It’s gone to my friends first rig using all of my old internals. i7 4790k & a Fury X! I’ve now got a 2080ti which I picked up for cheap a month before ampere dropped!
@@wowsuchname1939 damn lucky you then!! I sold my rx 5700 xt hoping to get my hands on a rtx 3060 ti.. but nope, this year's prices are f*cked!
ThexWITCHxMaster friend needed a rig and I’d rather the card get used. Got a good deal on a 2080ti as well !
@@wowsuchname1939 also giving PC parts to your friend is never something to regret imo
Its almost 2019, and i STILL love my R9 Fury-X and on my new Ryzen7 2700x x470mb and 16gbDDR4, this card runs AMAZING and so, #$%^ vega 64 and GTX 1080 ti, i think all stay with my fury-x because if im getting 90fps or 130fps on ALL VR OR none VR games on ULTRA. i think thats good enough for me.
This card is good for vr? Heavy games like project cars?
@@LorenzoClara97 I am still using mine that I got in 2016. I've ran Project Cars, Forza Horizon 3 and 4, and many other recent games.
Wait was this the card Linus dropped no wonder it died lol.
I still have a 670... should I upgrade? Not to the Fury X though, seeing the 980 Ti still beats it in most cases.
Masterdome You might as well get this card, the 980 ti only beats it by a couple of frames(in some cases) plus this card is on really early drivers so optimisation isn't great. Also this card is cheaper!
Masterdome
I also got the 670. Really it's as good as it needs to be for 1080p gaming. If you're going to stick with a regular 1920 x 1080 monitor then there isn't much of a reason to upgrade. If you're planning on getting a 4K... then yes upgrading would be very helpful in pushing all those pixels.
Some people might say "Oh but upcoming games like Star Citizen will be too much for my old card!" Yeah well... SC might still be a year away, so you should buy your new card in 2016 if you want to use it for SC.
Masterdome the 980ti only beats it non OC
Masterdome My vote to you goes to waiting to see what the 1000 series is like. My 670 is still going strong enough for reasonable graphics settings.
Masterdome Get a normal FURY, should be only 10% slower than X but a lot faster than 980 on a same price.
tho promising for a first gen
LE0NSKA If this is an Apple Watch reference, you win a cookie.
barmiro where did you get the apple watch from. The apple watch is neither original nor relevant to this channel
Wawaweewa Rice Most reviewers who were scared of losing Apple's goodwill said the Watch was "promising for a first gen". Honest reviewers, however, just bashed it.
barmiro that makes more sense, but no the fury X is legitimately good for the price. It is more quiet and cooler than a 980 ti, but if you get the water cooled version of the 980 ti then you get a definite winner
barmiro I'm affraid I did not, but I'll still take the cookie :P
still rockin a r9 270
lol skrub i have a gt 210
+TR-8R Hahaha, i have intel core graphics scrubz
+??? lol the gt 210 is worse than intel hd graphics
+TR-8R nice I'm rocking a intel i486
+Herp Looza why do you need that much performance
You call that a review?
It's just a video where you tell us what some other reviewer got, we did not even have context and the rest is just sponsor shit.
This is just plain fuck up. You had to put that video up that bad?? You really needed that money? fuck man. I'm really disappointed.
***** I know I sound like a fucking bitch maybe because I'm so angry how disappointing the fury X actually turned out to be....
I generally don't fucking care about the ads but the fact that did nothing with the card that I had high hopes for turned me into a fucking internet bitch.
I am impatiently waiting for win 10 benchmarks and hope that this will be it for the fury X or else I will have to buy for the very first time, a nvidia gpu :/
***** It must turn out to be good for AMD or else nvidia will have monopoly on the pc market and we deifinitely do NOT need that to happen.
***** More competition is better for us customers. So yeah, hoping is the only thing to do for now.
***** It's been confirmed for July 29 release.
nalorcs There are DOA products from every single company. don't be ridiculous.
Arrived D.O.A. A.K.A. Linus probably broke it when he dropped it outside of the new office, nice! :D
This video talks way too much about the size of the card. Why would it be a negative if electronics are small? It's what it does that matters. Why don't you glue on some useless plastic parts if you want to compensate for something?
+Penny Lane you assume LMG actually is an ethical and technical reviewer
***** Sure, but for whom would it be ever advantageous to have a larger card? Because that's where this video was initially coming from.
***** If there are enough of these people, there'll surely be a market for graphics card enlargements.
***** Well, that'd be a point but other companies are free to put a bigger cooler on the same hardware or enlarge the PCB if necessary.
+Penny Lane There are a few reasons to have a larger card. Mainly more spaced out PCB, which if shrinked too much could become extremely complicated (which generally means more expensive), larger spaces to put on more beefier power system, etc.
Most people are going to be watercooling these types of cards anyways. It doesn't hurt to have a better system for power delivery for reference cards which are usually the ones covered, minus EKWB. Sure the Fury X is already watercooled, but there are people who won't stop there :P
All the hype..... Damn that was really dissapointing
What were you expecting? Kepler and GCN have the same performance core for core. Maxwell gains a ~40% per core performance boost while AMD is still using their 2012 architecture from the HD 7000x series. 3072x1.4=4300.8 which is slighter higher than the 4096 cores found on Fiji. Still very impressive for a 2012 architecture
Axecution Uh...yeah...disappointing is AMD's business model.
Wawaweewa Rice It's not the same thing, though. It's GCN 1.3, which was introduced with Tonga.
Wawaweewa Rice actually GCN is something they have been iterating upon heavily (GCN 1.0 from 2012 is quite different to GCN 1.2 from 2015) and saying as we knew we were going to be somewhat slowed down in the die shrinks deparment iterating upon something makes sense
if you want the paradigm shifts wait untill next year and 16nm/HBM gen 2
*****
***** GCN is a long term architecture and 1.2 has little differences from 1.0 in terms of actual performance, just minor tweaks
Tonga's main benefit was color compression, but it peformed almost identically to the 280 as well as the older 7850
I think integrated water cooling for your GPU is a great idea and I'd love to see more options like this.
Who is watching after this beast gone legacy?
Well yeah it has HBM and yes it's the first card of it's kind...but the 980Ti has 2GB more RAM, is often faster, uses less power and costs about the same...I'm kind of team red but seriosly AMD it's a nice small card but WHY would I buy it for my normal sized PC??
Highspeedfutzi you wouldn't. considering you can't even overclock this card there really is no reason to buy it I would wait for the next gen. cards to come out before trying this new tech out.
Highspeedfutzi great for that briefcase gameing comp outthere.
Ryan Price You can overclock the gpu, but not the Memory. Well considering how good the memory is tough I doubt it would be that necesary anyway.
Highspeedfutzi Agreed. At this point there is no proper reason to go for a Fury X (if the benchmarks shown in this video are even remotely true).
7 years of development for a technology that can only pull off 4 GB of memory... seriously...
I'm more into AMD but this is kinda pathetic.
kABUSE 2nd gen will have 8gb AMD just had to rlease something
I think AMD knows that 1080p and 1440p won't be the future and you got plenty of performance for those resolutions already with lower tier cards, so they purely optimized for resolutions of 4K and above, because that's where the Fury X really starts to shine with 10-20% more performance than a Titan X. In compute performance it even beats the Titan X by 75%, while using less power completing the same task, so it is definitely not aimed at the casual gamer. What's interesting is that only one game can max out the 4GB HBM stacks at 4K, which is Assassin's Creed: Unity and with the improved compression it uses less VRAM than the 290X, so it won't be a bottleneck in upcoming games with even better texture compression. At this time it's the most powerful and most efficient workstation card, let's see what the drivers will bring in the future.
Razor Blade If AMD are counting on 4K becoming standard within the lifetime of this card, they're going to be sorely disappointed. 4K is still a few years away from becoming the standard for PC gaming and I think it would be very foolish of AMD to be concentrating on that market at this point in time. We're talking about a company that's hemorrhaging money at the moment and cannot afford to ignore where the majority of the market is today.
MiloDarkStar Many people are using 4K already and since the prices for those monitors are dropping drastically we will probably see the majority of users sitting infront of one or more 4K screens in 2 years. Nobody wants to pay a premium for a graphics card able to handle these resolutions then, so the technology has to be brought to the market now. This is not a card for the masses, it's for the people who want to enjoy and test gaming at those resolutions now. Someone who can only afford a 1080p or 1440p screen won't aim for such a powerful graphics card anyway.
***** I already said AC: Unity is the only game that would need more than 4GB on 4K on the Fury X, but still there are no framedrops or any other issues. Look up the reviews and you will find the Fury X with 4GB HBM beating the Titan X with 12GB and the 980TI with 6GB in almost every game at 4K, even in GTA V. NVIDIA cards need more VRAM as their compression ratio is not that high as it is on GCN 1.2. In addition to that the Fury X handles it's memory usage dynamically in a very efficient way without crippling the performance. In Witcher 3 @ 4K with Ultra details it uses only 2GB. With HBM 2 there will also be configurations of 4GB-8GB per stack, so 16GB-32GB per GPU with double the speed. I'm not sure if they will release it on this generation of cards, but definitely on the next one.
***** No they don't. Some game engines will load as much as they can into the video memory. Thas does NOT mean it is all filled up with textures the game will be using any time soon. 4gb will be enough even for UHD gaming. The fact that the 390 has 8gb only has to do with MARKETING!
Rem ko Actually the 390 and 390X have 8GB GDDR5 because it doesn't cause much more cost, as GDDR5 is damn cheap. The reason why they only have 1GB per stack on the Fury is that HBM is just not in it's final state yet.
Woah, Luke, I didn't expect THAT (1:30)
But you made my day, congrats xD.
The mini build guide of those cables actually made me finally understand the point of easily customized cables. Very neat. Although I imagine it would be very easy to mess it up and short out your entire everything.
Now that the Fury X has dropped in price to $349 (at least as of writing this), is this card more worth it even with Pascal on the market?
I would recommend the 1060 or 1070 if you can shell out the extra money. Or, you can even get the RX 480
Depends on what you want from the system. The thing is, everyone was comparing the Fury X to the 980 Ti when it first came out when really that wasn't what it's for. The best part about the Fury X is that it's extremely quiet, to get the same noise levels you need to compare other liquid cooled GPUs which makes the X actually pretty good value.
I wouldn't recommend buying one right now, though. Pick up an RX 480 for cheap and let that hold you over while saving your money until Vega 10 launches which is looking to be right around december.
The 1070 hardly beats the fury x, it only faster than a normal fury.
For that price there is no doubt that the 1070 is a better "bang for buck", but the R9 Fury X does come somewhat close in performance, is quieter, and supports FreeSync. Ultimately I find it a worthwhile value proposition for 1080P games at that price.
The Fury X is 50$ cheaper atm tho
Fury X = Titan X Killer
***** Not sure you watched the video until the end :D
funny way to spell 980ti
***** Or watch the video and make another conclusion ;)
***** And in a month it is obsolete again because another card beats it in some benchmark score, a score not noticeable in practise though.
***** So is 980 ti.
Any one else looking at the R9 295x2 coming out on top nearly every time.
***** Are you stupid? If the Titan x had a massive TDP would it still not be the fastest card? Just because the card has a big TDP doesn't mean its not good...
***** I never said the Titan had a 600 watt TDP you moron. All I said in the first place was that its a powerful card lol.
***** No what I said was that even IF it had a 600watt TDP it would still be the fastest card, I never said high TDP is better.
+HNPreborn 295X2 is actually 500w TDP
+HNPreborn dumbass
It's a funny day to watch this using my RX 6800 XT
I appreciate that you guys experiment with your video format and structure, not many people out there are brave enough to do that :) Plus, I think that the flak you guys get for stuff sometimes is pure ridiculous - keep up the good work!
I really like the new ad format! very helpful and it has a very natural sounding promotion of the product which is like a mini review itself.
The FuryX didn't live up to the hype. I cri.
WTF it only beats the 980 ti in far cry 4? I thought this card would be at least 10% faster but as it turns out the rumors were fake and Its even slower
Zoltan Jankai why do you think rumours stopped as the 980ti was released? there was nothing to brag about.
But 30°C lower temperature
Not for me, I'm watercooling my whole PC, as do a lot of people buying such high-end components.
Henrix98 It might be 30 degrees lower, but there is a reason it has a water cooler. It kicks out so much hot air and all this is going into your room
Axecution 980ti + water = 100€ more, so
Lenght isn't everything -Luke 2015
Just saw Fury X in a local marketplace for a coffee and a doughnut price, came to youtube to check if I should.... And here's young Luke telling me all about it!!!! Great!!
AMD said the bandwidth had plenty more performance to provide, but they were literally hit by the interposer chip size limit on the GPU side, so couldn't throw as many transistors at it to make the chip itself faster to take advantage of it. The next process shrink can't come soon enough, we're literally at the performance limits of 28nm unless interposers somehow get bigger.
just realized where amd got their new cpu name lol
progste ?
earth418 the title, "Has Red 𝐫𝐢𝐬𝐞𝐧 once again?" risen - 𝐫𝐲𝐳𝐞𝐧, their new cpu
The Fury X has so loud coil whine...:(
Wow, a third of this video is a plug and the review is about how it looks and sounds since the sample was broken and therefore doesn't cover the thing that is most important, or rather the only thing that really matters which is how well it works. Would it not have been better and shown greater integrity to not release this video until a working sample had been tested? It's a card showcase followed by an advert and no original material in terms of critique or analysis.
Stephen Wakeman Well they still got the views...
Stephen Wakeman Agree.This is so unprofessional. They dont have the card,used other reviewer's benchmark (which has shitty graphs btw), and still has the audacity to publish it in time with the nda lift. Also that ending ads takes up like 1/5 of this video.Shame on you LTT
Man, watching all of the build guides and looking at all the PC's. Yet, I know I well never be able to buy/build. I can only look and wish to get one of them.
The way Luke did that hammer action made me Cri 😆absolute perfection
GG AMD you tried, you failed GG
Gary Calismax GG NVIDIA fanboy you tried, you failed GG
***** Actually im running both AMD CPU (fx-6100) and a msi AMD- r9 280x, I just am not impressed with their progress in the last 4 years. IMO they put their fingers in too many pies (CPU,APU,GPU) and lost ground on their competitors. i used to hate team green, but these days honestly they are looking like the better company. Intel stuck to cpus and made some real nice progress in that field then branched out into ssds and nvidia stuck to gpus and has dominated the market. the truth hurts me just as much, and i hate to admit it but truth is truth. take last year for example when amd released there 8gb card and thought they had one over nvidia. Less than 8weeks later nvidia just casually threw out their 12gb titan z. unless AMD are holding back and going to produce something amazing that smashes 980ti/titan X for the same price or something with similar performance for a fraction of the cost (which had mainly been their marketing strategy for the last 7 years) i think they are going to hemorrhage money become bankrupt and end up like the dinosaurs.
berzu21 i would more so say that it was due to the fact that the team in charge of porting arkham knight, where 12 people who primarily worked with consoles not PC, also strange how recommended GPU ram for nvidia cards is 2gb and AMD is 3gb, this either shows that the poor guys who had no real clue how to port a console game to pc mainly used nvidia cards for optimisation, or that AMD cards are inefficient at utilising the onboard ram (this could also be tied to the rumour that nvidia have underhandedly paid companies to focus on their cards rather than AMD's this was brought up upon the witcher 3 release), i would like to believe my former statement is true. Also not to mention most games these days on day one release have problems, that and also AMD users have also experienced problems with this game even after the AMD driver update specially implemented for arkham knight.
berzu21 so we are in agreement that the port is shit. and not that nvidia ruined it, like your initial comment said.......
berzu21 developer team aka pc port team broke arkham knnight
Software wise its still AMD lol (Aka not good xD)
Go educate yourself .
DANNYonPC not true, never had issues with drivers nor the gpu itself. It's the game's developer that has issues making it work well for the gpu...not AMD's job.
DANNYonPC STFU
DANNYonPC I've been using AMD for 10 years, only had 1 driver problem then I fixed in 1 hour when I switched from Windows 7 to Windows 8.1
Fkn Mickey Not even talking about the drivers but the special functions and things like shadowplay (No gamedvr isn't even close )
Not sure if title was trying to reference communism
Okay I'm sorry but why would communism be the first thing you think of when you read the title
Look at the flags of the communist flag, all have a Red background with yellow star. China, Russia, Vietnam if I remember
Lance Lindle Lee
Well I guess I wouldn't disagree with the connection being made but I guess I just didn't see it lol
"Red" is kind of a symbol for Communism, especially when the first letter is in Caps.
My favorite moment was when Luke went,"BOOM"
I enjoyed the cablemod part actually. I've been looking into them recently and this helped!
This card is SO FUCKING pretty. I don't care if it's marginally worse than a 980ti. This technology might be what brings AMD back to the game in a year or less.
+Julian Pava me too if i'm geting a 600$ card getting this one
If nvidia drivers weren't shit right now, 980 ti would be the obvious choice. I have two 980s btw, not trolling or anything. It's been a shitty season as far as games go with these horrible console ports.
Nvidia fixed the drivers. 980 ti is obvious choice.
Corey Muncey haha, that was quick :P #TWSS
Red has RYZEN.
George QQ The $300 price isn't confirmed, and it's great if it does end up costing that much. A $300 6900k would be useless?
***** It has a higher clock speed than the 6900k, and dual-channel DDR4 (or even DDR3) has been shown to have more than enough bandwidth for any practical consumer application, such as gaming (Linus has talked about this on this channel).
AMD never said the RX 480 would be even close to the 1080. Those claims were made by false rumors. AMD said that it would roughly match an R9 390, which it does. As far as the Fury X's performance goes, watch the video or read a review. It falls a bit short of the 980 Ti, but is way ahead of the 980 (with the exception of the GameWorks-riddled Project Cars).
***** I haven't fallen for the hype train. My stance is based on all of the official information that has been released up until now. I think that if it actually does perform similarly to the 6900k, it will be at least $500. What do you mean by "they let rumor happen"? Intel and Nvidia don't comment on rumors before launch, either. You show me the benchmarks that put the Fury X between a bunch of GTX 980s in a wide range of titles. I've read many Fury X reviews, and it's very rare to see a 980 scoring higher than a Fury X in any game, let alone most of them.
***** And only unsubstantiated rumors have claimed that it will cost $300. I haven't claimed that it will cost $300, you did.
***** Then that would be a pretty stupid assumption, since (like I said earlier), these companies don't comment on rumors.
I liked the build log thing at the end. I might prefer that sort of demo to being told about a product via sales pitch.
I'm so not disappointed by this. As the owner of smaller case I am excited to be able to be able to finally fit all this power in my PC! I'm almost certainly gonna go for an R9 Nano!
The Performance - to - Size ratio is the real winner for me here. I don't really care that it's 2-3 frames per second less powerful than a GTX 980 Ti
I'm not an AMD fan boy but this video seems fishy...
- AMD sends new gpu
- Linus drops it on the ground
- Says it arrived DOA
- Can't do tests so look at these graphs from another website that tested mostly Nvidia optimized games.
- Nvidia's cheaper GTX 980 is better
- Three minutes of advertisements
BTW LTT is sponsored by Intel & Nvidia
Hype train de railed .
yes
Choo choo... Next stop, dissapointaland
Chugga-chugga-choo-ch-IGCITSIUGLUFJTDUTDGCGVHBRAMWHOMPAAHHHU
BradTechLee e new train is going on tho...the ZEN train...Thats all Amd fanboys got, dreaming big and then get disappointed..
futmut1000 Yeah, it's kind of sad hearing: "Oh yeah? Well..l just you wait, they are going to release a new driver that is going to make it 20% faster! And then, and then, when you can overclock it, it's going to be way faster too!" Just pat them on the back, and say: "That's right little Jimmy, that Fury X is going to grow up and be big and strong, and it's going to get out of that wheelchair and do great things!"
is that missing a screw? (top left under "Radeon")
Yeah ikr?
No, its just the angle makes it look black
Khalid Abu Shawarib i beg to differ
I like the whole "build" advertisement setup. It really kept me watching way more than usual.
WOW 225,000 views in under 24hrs !!! That speaks for itself. I'd never buy such a card yet still love to watch your reviews. Kudos
Literally only chose benchmarks that always favor nvidia.
risen = ryzen
you = intel fanboy
LMAO, DOA and artifacting onAMD's flagship card. Way to go AMD, you couldn't even ship the card, little less beat the 980 ti.
***** He said his card was DOA, not to mention the scores on the video showed lower frames on most games. So how about you come to me with a valid point, fucking idiot.
***** I'm not going to drag this any further, I'll just state facts for you. 980 ti > Fury X. They're literally the same price, but the 980 ti gets higher frames. And the benchmarks come from a fully functioning Fury X. Now get out of my post, everyone sees that you're a pathetic troll, a bad one at that.
Hector, he's a troll just shh just don't care if trolls are hungry shh
Ben Lin Yeah, I knew since the beggining, just wanted to fuck his troll logic. Ended his troll mindgame and made him look like a dumbass. 😜
***** ok little troll
So it has come to light that this card might actually perform way better than most people thought. Most reviews were done using driver version 15.15-150611a-185358E but with the new 15.15-180612a-18565BE it is supposed to even beat the titan x in some tests. I'm just trying to get more people aware of this. Here's the reddit post containing more information: www.reddit.com/r/pcmasterrace/comments/3b2ep8/fury_x_possibly_reviewed_with_incorrect_drivers/
am i the only one who love the "boom" Luke make on 1:50? XD
Writing from 2022, I have this in my RYZEN 9 5900X 64GB. Seems OK driving my 1440p 144Hz screen.
When you gonna upgrade to a Radeon 7000 series or RTX 30/40 series card?
@@syntrx8185 This FuryX is fine for what I do. I will probably get a VEGA for £150 soon having sold one for £500. Something I am really keen on is high refresh rate monitors. Not so much for gaming but the quality of scrolling and mouse movement. My aim would be to have a 360Hz screen which would dictate which GPU I required.
@@wayland7150 Here's a monitor suggestion: ua-cam.com/video/eYFtLBM3a78/v-deo.html
I appreciate including the fact that this gpu can support 6 displays. Would be interested in having this in future graphics card videos. Thanks LTT
Hardware Canucks got results that competed quite strongly with the GTX 980Ti and Titan X. Plus, they note some acoustic information about the card. I would check out their review of the card as well.
for everyone dissapointed, alot of the benchmarks are saying that the fury x is higher than the 980ti, plus it is running on a very low clock speed with water cooling so lets see how a 2ghz version shall run against the titan x
This is their first venture into a new era for graphics cards, so I'll just hold onto my money and wait for whatever they come up with in the future, when HBM is more mature.
I like how it's enclosed in a nice case.
I love how this card looks. So minimalistic and clean. Very cool.
It seriously looks like some sci-fi piece from an 80's movie. I love it.
I've been debating on getting a new card for awhile, but after looking at the FPS reviews, im not so sure I need one. I know there is more to a game than just the GPU so maybe im doing something right.
My FPS scores (all are based on max graphics 1080p)
Alien Isolation-Avg 63
Far Cry 4-Avg 58
GTA V-Avg 57
Project Cars-Avg 57
Shadows of Mordor-Avg 56
Dying Light-Avg 58
No tweaking of the graphics, changing draw distance or anything. Just Ultra settings and playing. Full screen 1080p.
System
AMD FX8350 Black-Clocked to 4.5ghz
MSI R7970 HD Boost Edition
16gb Corsair Vengance Pro
1Tb SSD
Aftermarket fans, no liquid cooling or anything.
In fact the only game I have come across I need to change anything on was Ark, holy shit that game is intense. All medium settings and barely making 30 frames, shit is brutal.
Im going to wait another year or two before I decide to change.
This LTT era was so much better than the cringe stuff of today. Miss Luke as a presenter. Hiring went off the rails.
Only problem with HBM is that the latency is worse than GDDR5. Cache misses cost a lot more, meaning optimization is even more important...
The two 8 pin pci-e power plugs support up to 300 watts, the card gets the other 75 watts from the pci-e slot itself.
The way Luke said that was incorrect, so I thought I'd share my wisdom.
i liked the build log at the end
I like the look of SLI bridges, especially those rigid metal ones for some of the Nvidia cards.
As soon as Brandon said "Boom" at 1:51, lightning took out my power, followed by an ear piercing boom.
Confirmed. Brandon is Thor.
He's luke tho
Water cooling, small form factor, and performance right there with the GTX 980ti with most games staying between 2-3 FPS from it and that is at launch, so expect that to improve with driver revisions. I think the Fury X is an awesome card.
To be honest, the GTX 980Ti and the R9 Fury X both perform the same. But the Fury X saves you 150$ at this point...
All of these panning shots are beautiful.
you probably killed it in the LMG HQ vlog
I would love see if an AMD latest and greatest APU coupled with a Fury/Fury X/Nano would yield a significant performance gain over a regular CPU/GPU combination
The performance is pretty good, no one expect for Fury X to really beat 980 Ti, the main thing is the price, if fury is gonna be cheaper by anywhere from 70-150 bucks then yh, amd did their part.
Definately waiting for the regular Fury. Hopefully wont be that much different other than the lack of the built in water cooling.
the future of GPU is in the built in water cooling block. while i predict many cards will come equipped with standard fans for rigging to a custom cooling loop, there's just so much ease and consistency in a built in, ready-to-go AIO unit....right inside the card. i like that.
I would love to see you overclock the fury x. What do you mean it’s 5 years later
Maybe if they removed the watercooler, put a cheaper Air cooling shroud on it, they could cut the cost of the whole unit drastically and basically offer something that performs on par with a 980ti for a whole bunch less. The watercooler is nice and all, but I feel it's holding this card back a little.
Smart money will go with the nvidia 980ti and wait for HBM to mature into 2.0 with the Pascal Gpus. The AIO watercooling is a sign of weakness from the start to hide high temps and high power draw that would come with having more than 1 fan.
Paying a premium for the watercooling is absolutely no problem, as you can get the normal Fury (The video is the Fury X), which is air-cooled. No problem here.
Anyone else notice it somehow lost the top left screw at some point for some of the closeups and got it back for the rest of the video?
Im seeing alot of negative views on this video maybe it would be worth trying again with some proper benchmarks this time:)
Everyone keep in mind that drivers make a huge difference. They are comparing launch drivers versus cards with multiple driver updates. No card from anybody has ever had it's best performance on day 1.
Barack Smith While this is true lets get realistic, they launch a card they have been working in for years to beat the competition and they cant make a driver to beat it at launch? So if it takes them years to make it do you think they will improve the driver weeks or months after launch?
If so they are no better than releasing faulty games with first week patches, its getting out of hand with these companies.
Hopefully once the new Drivers are released and we can OC the card it'll get a nice performance boost.
regarding the cablemod cables... I don't think I would use these... ever.
I like every cable to be the same.
They don't have any SATA, Molex or Header cable extensions?
Surely wouldn't cost much to add those to the line-up, since they don't even assemble them. Maybe a thinner gauge cabling is required and they just couldn't be assed working it out, I don't know.
Seems like a no-brainer to me though!
Talking about noticing the difference between 4k and 1080p, 3:19.
I'm all about cards being
1. Smaller
2. attached to a dedicated liquid cooler
These are good things! Your gaming rig does not need to be a full size tower to function cool itself. It can be small and spicy like a habanero. +1 from me
I would love to see a Open CL Benchmark, 4K Davinci Resolve, Adobe Premiere and if possible NUKE X ...